| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory? |
| Date: | 2025-06-24 15:12:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQSd=45pC2wJ90YDRbw1KA0jG-7J8=Y_8A4_M39Th9nCdA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 17:07, Jacob Champion
<jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> So that's
> 1) return an (empty) cancellation object even if the server has not
> sent a key, and
> 2) error out when trying to cancel with an empty object?
Yes (and empty being non-NULL obviously)
> That sounds reasonable to me.
Alright, let's do that then. I could probably write a patch for that tomorrow.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2025-06-24 15:12:45 | Re: Simplify VM counters in vacuum code |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-06-24 15:07:41 | Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory? |