Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby
Date: 2017-01-26 19:36:11
Message-ID: CANP8+jK75m4XnobReuZ6vPJthMQ4a+qnNaq3dxefq2bjno9nEA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 26 January 2017 at 19:20, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2017-01-26 12:24:44 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Currently a waiting standby doesn't allow interrupts.
>> >
>> > Patch implements that.
>> >
>> > Barring objection, patching today with backpatches.
>>
>> "today" is a little quick, but the patch looks fine. I doubt anyone's
>> going to screech too loud about adding a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() call.
>
> I don't quite get asking for agreement, and then not waiting as
> suggested. I'm personally fine with going with a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS
> for now, but I think it'd better to replace it with a latch.

I have waited, so not sure what you mean. Tomorrow is too late.

Replacing with a latch wouldn't be backpatchable, IMHO.

I've no problem if you want to work on a deeper fix for future versions.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-01-26 19:37:07 Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-01-26 19:34:17 Re: Performance improvement for joins where outer side is unique