| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: EINTR in ftruncate() |
| Date: | 2022-07-04 11:07:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20220704110750.li6iiwivv4smgmbx@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-Jul-01, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-07-01 19:55:16 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2022-Jul-01, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > What is the reason for the || ProcDiePending || QueryCancelPending bit? What
> > > if there's dsm operations intentionally done while QueryCancelPending?
> >
> > That mirrors the test for the other block in that function, which was
> > added by 63efab4ca139, whose commit message explains:
> That whole approach seems quite wrong to me. At the absolute very least the
> code needs to check if interrupts are being processed in the current context
> before just giving up due to ProcDiePending || QueryCancelPending.
For the time being, I can just push the addition of the EINTR retry
without testing ProcDiePending || QueryCancelPending.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"El sudor es la mejor cura para un pensamiento enfermo" (Bardia)
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-retry-ftruncate.patch | text/x-diff | 1.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Przemysław Sztoch | 2022-07-04 11:08:33 | Re: generate_series for timestamptz and time zone problem |
| Previous Message | Przemysław Sztoch | 2022-07-04 11:00:03 | Re: generate_series for timestamptz and time zone problem |