Tom Lane wrote:
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > I think the much more significant change is the following
> > one not the above one.
> Well, yes; the "above" change was just a last-gasp attempt to make the
> old scheme work, whereas the "following" change introduced the new
As far as I see, the introduction of the ImmediateInterruptOK
flag made HOLD/RESUME_INTERRUPTS scheme pretty meaningless.
Does 'die' interrupts still really need HOLD/RESUME_INTERRUPTS
scheme ? If 'die' interrupts are only for normal shutdown,
even LockWaitCancel() isn't needed.
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-01-08 00:08:51|
|Subject: Re: pgsql/src backend/tcop/postgres.c include/misc ... |
|Previous:||From: momjian||Date: 2002-01-07 22:36:56|
|Subject: pgsql/contrib/mysql my2pg.pl|