From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: Overhauling our interrupt handling (was Escaping from blocked send() reprised.) |
Date: | 2015-01-30 14:29:59 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZoCs4o8mne8aNzkR2iVdeQynHwrb2PS7+64KA5HWjBoA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> 0002: Use a nonblocking socket for FE/BE communication and block using
> latches.
>
> Has previously been reviewed by Heikki. I think Noah also had a
> look, although I'm not sure how close that was.
>
> I think this can be committed soon.
Doesn't this significantly increase the number of system calls? I
worry there could be a performance issue here.
> 0003: Introduce and use infrastructure for interrupt processing during client reads.
>
> From here on ImmediateInterruptOK isn't set during client
> communication. Normal interrupts and sinval/async interrupts are
> processed outside of signal handlers. Especially the sinval/async
> greatly simplify the respective code.
ProcessNotifyInterrupt() seems like it could lead to a failure to
respond to other interrupts if there is a sufficiently vigorous stream
of notify interrupts. I think there ought to be one loop that goes
through and tries to handle each kind of interrupt in turn and then
loops until no interrupts remain.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Geoff Winkless | 2015-01-30 14:59:12 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0 |
Previous Message | Sawada Masahiko | 2015-01-30 12:38:10 | Re: Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL |