| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher |
| Date: | 2007-10-12 17:51:42 |
| Message-ID: | 325.1192211502@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Can you explain further what you meant by "don't disable manual
> cancels".
I meant that pg_cancel_backend() should still work on autovac workers,
contrary to Alvaro's suggestion that autovac workers should sometimes
ignore SIGINT.
Basically the implementation vision I have is that the SIGINT catcher in
an autovac worker should remain stupid, and any intelligence involved
should be on the side where we're deciding whether to send a signal or
not. This probably does involve exposing more state in PGPROC but I see
nothing much wrong with that. (It might be time to merge inVacuum,
isAutovacuum, and the additional state into a bitwise vacuumFlags field.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-10-12 18:16:55 | Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-10-12 17:41:31 | Re: Locales and Encodings |