Le 30/06/2010 06:53, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : > Le 30/06/2010 05:25, Tom Lane a écrit : >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >>>> So this is not something we want fixed for 9.0, as indicated by Simon? >>>> I don't see the patch on the commit-fest page yet. >> >>> I tend to think we should fix it for 9.0, but could be talked out of >>> it if someone has a compelling argument to make. >> >> Er, maybe I lost count, but I thought you were the one objecting to >> the patch. >> > > You're right. Robert questioned the use of CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in > code available in the src/port directory. I don't see what issue could > result with this. He also said that whatever would be commited should be > back-patched. > > I can still add it for the next commit fest, I just don't want this > patch to get lost. Though I won't be able to do this before getting back > from work. >
Finally, I added it to the next commit fest. Robert can work on it before if he wants to (or has the time). https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=331 -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
