From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in pg_buffercache_pages while scanning the buffers |
Date: | 2025-08-14 23:57:08 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoCN5Vj4EvpC2y8oF7aQdfvPsMQRw76KuMLU1iZFdzBASw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:59 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:31 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Please find attached patch that adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS while scanning the buffers in pg_buffercache_pages. I checked other functions in the module and this check already exists in pg_buffercache_numa_pages.
>
> Thank you for the patch!
>
> I think the patch is reasonable and it looks good to me. I'll push it
> to master early next week, barring objections.
After reviewing this patch more, I'm leaning toward to backpatch this
change. The patch adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() to
pg_buffercache_pages(), pg_buffercache_summary(), and
pg_buffercache_usage_counts(), and the latter two functions were
introduced in v16. Therefore, for v15 or older we can add CFI to only
pg_buffercache_pages() and apply this patch to v16 or newer. Thoughts?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Smith | 2025-08-15 00:53:10 | Re: Skipping schema changes in publication |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-08-14 23:36:49 | Re: index prefetching |