| From: | Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)Optiver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: OOM kill during planning - pg_terminate_backend is ignored |
| Date: | 2026-09-02 12:50:18 |
| Message-ID: | MRWPR09MB83572069158FFE1B01D20178CCB72@MRWPR09MB8357.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Andres,
Thanks for your reply.
> I think we'd need a separation between the function to start initiating a tree
> walk/mutation and the function called for every recursion level. Then we can
> do the CFI() in the "start a tree walk" function, without having to do it the
> expression_tree_walker_impl(), once per processed node.
It looks like query_or_expression_tree_walker_impl and
query_or_expression_tree_mutator_impl actually have this property of
only being called when starting a tree walk. Perhaps it's OK to add the
check for interrupts at the start of these two functions? I can create a
patch for this if this is an acceptable approach.
-Floris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2026-09-02 12:50:51 | Re: Function scan FDW pushdown |
| Previous Message | Vaibhav Dalvi | 2026-09-02 12:39:40 | Re: [PATCH] Add support for INSERT ... SET syntax |