Re: GIN pending clean up is not interruptable

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GIN pending clean up is not interruptable
Date: 2015-09-03 11:29:33
Message-ID: CAHGQGwHt1-+abnyNgwHS8EHmQE7==jujLx7MYVr6nh6h0NYwkA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-09-03 12:45:34 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> > On 2015-08-12 11:59:48 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> >> Attached patch does it that way. There was also a free-standing
>> >> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() which had no reason that I could see not be a
>> >> vacuum_delay_point, so I changed that one as well.
>>
>> - if (vac_delay)
>> - vacuum_delay_point();
>> + vacuum_delay_point();
>>
>> If vac_delay is false, e.g., ginInsertCleanup() is called by the backend,
>> vacuum_delay_point() should not be called. No?
>
> No, that's the whole point of the change, we need a
> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() even when called by backends. I personally think
> it's rather ugly to rely on the the one in vacuum_delay_point,

Same here.

> but Jeff
> and Tom think it's better, and I can live with that.

OK, probably I can live with that, too.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-09-03 11:41:37 Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
Previous Message Amit Langote 2015-09-03 11:20:25 Re: BRIN INDEX value