Re: [PATCH] V3: Idle in transaction cancellation

Andres Freund wrote:
> On Thursday 02 December 2010 22:21:37 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of sáb oct 30 05:49:21 -0300 2010:
>>
>>> Ill set this up for the next commitfest, I don't think I can do much
>>> more without further input.
>>>
>> Are you reserving about 20 bits for levels, and 12 for flags? Given the
>> relatively scarce growth of levels, I think we could live with about 6
>> or 7 bits for level, rest for flags.
>>
> The number I picked was absolutely arbitrary I admit. Neither did I think it
> would be likely to see more levels, nor did I forsee many flags, so I just
> chose some number I liked in that certain moment ;-)
>

This bit of detail seems to have died down without being resolved;
bumping it to add a reminder about that.

I count four issues of various sizes left with this patch right now:

1) This levels bit
2) Can the approach used be simplified or the code made cleaner?
3) What is the interaction with Hot Standby error handling?
4) The usual code formatting nitpicking, Kevin mentioned braces being an
issue

Robert is already thinking about (2); I'll keep an eye out for someone
who can test (3) now that it's been identified as a concern; and the
other two are pretty small details once those are crossed. I don't see
this as being ready to commit just yet though, so I don't see this going
anywhere other than returned for now; will mark it as such. Hopefully
this will gather enough additional review to continue moving forward now
that the main issues are identified.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books