Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to do_pg_stop_backup (and others?)
От | Greg Jaskiewicz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to do_pg_stop_backup (and others?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5275C3DA-9BBE-4F6A-AAED-E60FBBF9815F@pointblue.com.pl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to do_pg_stop_backup (and others?) (Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to
do_pg_stop_backup (and others?)
Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to do_pg_stop_backup (and others?) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 19 Oct 2011, at 18:28, Florian Pflug wrote: > All the other flags which indicate cancellation reasons are set from signal handers, I believe. We could of course markas ClientConnectionLostPending as volatile just to be consistent. Not sure whether that's a good idea, or not. It mightprevent a mistake should we ever add code to detect lost connections asynchronously (i.e., from somewhere else thanpq_flush). And the cost is probably negligible, because CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS tests for InterruptPending before callingProcessInterrupts(), so we only pay the cost of volatile if there's actually an interrupt pending. But I still thinkit's better to add qualifies such a volatile only when really necessary. A comment about why it *isn't* volatile isprobably in order, though, so I'll add that in the next version of the patch. > Makes sense. I had to ask, because it sticks out. And indeed there is a possibility that someone will one day will try to use from signalhandler, etc. > best regards, > Florian Pflug > > PS: Thanks for the review. It's very much appreciated! No problem, Got inspired by the talk I attended here at the pgconf.eu. Seems like a good idea to do these things, I haveyears of experience as developer and doing (relatively) well thanks to PostgreSQL - makes sense to contribute somethingback.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: