| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance |
| Date: | 2005-10-24 15:04:13 |
| Message-ID: | 435CF7ED.4050103@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>3. A pl/pgsql function stuck in a empty loop is unkillable except by
>>killing the process on the server, which cycles the entire server. This
>>was the behavior before the patch, btw.
>>
>>
>
>Hmm, that suggests we need another CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS somewhere in
>plpgsql. Please show the exact test case you were using.
>
>
We might be able to solve that for plpgsql, but in general we can't,
ISTM. What if I write a plperl function that loops forever? We have no
chance there to call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-24 15:10:54 | Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2005-10-24 14:55:37 | Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance |