| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Don't use the deprecated and insecure PQcancel in our frontend tools anymore |
| Date: | 2026-07-07 22:28:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQSF214DY91QRNRCSqJhJKy4r83qTcmdX-FdFbh6h26K1g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 7 Jul 2026 at 16:52, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> Yeah, I guess that works.. But It's a little unsatisfactory to have to
> poll, where we didn't poll before. I started to go down the rabbit hole,
> here are the options I can think of:
Honestly, I like the fallback to 1-second polling quite a bit better
than any of the options you proposed. The benefit of your options
(afaict) is making sure a very rare 1 second delay in a cancel for
pg_dump/pg_restore cannot happen on most platforms. That seems like a
rather insignificant benefit. But to achieve that the code on Windows
(and depending on the option other platforms) is now different, which
makes testing any future changes to the code much harder for anyone
who doesn't have Windows. I don't think the benefit is worth that
downside in this instance.
I guess my general thoughts on this is that I would like the behaviour
of Windows and Unix to become closer, not further apart (unless there
are significant benefits to doing so).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-07-07 22:36:18 | Re: allow spread checkpoints when changing checksums online |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2026-07-07 22:26:41 | Re: hashjoins vs. Bloom filters (yet again) |