Re: pg_prewarm really needs some CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_prewarm really needs some CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS
Date: 2014-11-11 12:11:02
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTdzggRbJv_cXOOXN_61t3ZKj_DOVRUw7+q83ak3JjNmA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> pg_prewarm() currently can't be cannot be interrupted - which seems odd
> given that it's intended to read large amounts of data from disk. A
> rather slow process.
>
> Unless somebody protests I'm going to add a check to the top of each of
> the three loops.
Good idea, +1.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2014-11-11 12:11:54 Re: PENDING_LIST_CLEANUP_SIZE - maximum size of GIN pending list Re: HEAD seems to generate larger WAL regarding GIN index
Previous Message Abhijit Menon-Sen 2014-11-11 11:26:00 Re: What exactly is our CRC algorithm?