Re: checking for interrupts during heap insertion

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: checking for interrupts during heap insertion
Date: 2014-06-23 19:30:50
Message-ID: 53A8806A.1040601@vmware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06/23/2014 08:07 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> While talking to Amit Kapila this morning, he mentioned to me that
> there seem to be no CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() calls anywhere in
> heap_multi_insert() or the functions it calls. Should there be?

Haven't heard any complaints, but I guess..

> By way of contrast, heapgetpage() has this:
>
> /*
> * Be sure to check for interrupts at least once per page. Checks at
> * higher code levels won't be able to stop a seqscan that encounters many
> * pages' worth of consecutive dead tuples.
> */
> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS();
>
> In heap_multi_insert(), we first do heap_prepare_insert() on each
> tuple, which may involve dirtying many pages, since it handles TOAST.
> Then, we loop over the tuples themselves and dirty a bunch more pages.
> All of that will normally happen pretty quickly, but if the I/O
> subsystem is very slow for some reason, such as due to heavy system
> load, then it might take quite a long time. I'm thinking we might
> want a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the following two places:
>
> 1. Inside toast_save_datum, at the top of the loop that starts with
> "while (data_todo > 0)".
> 2. Inside heap_multi_insert, at the top of the loop that starts with
> "while (ndone < ntuples)".

Seems reasonable.

- Heikki

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2014-06-23 19:34:25 Re: Minmax indexes
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-06-23 19:10:39 Re: Minmax indexes