Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Wouldn't it be better to move the catchup interrupt processing out of
> the signal handler? For normal backends we only enable when reading from
> the client and DoingCommandRead is set. How about setting a variable in
> the signal handler and doing the actual catchup processing after the
> recv() returned EINTR?
Only it won't. See SA_RESTART. I think turning that off is a nonstarter,
as per previous discussions.
> That'd require either renegging on SA_RESTART or
> using WaitLatchOrSocket() and nonblocking send/recv.
Yeah, I was wondering about using WaitLatchOrSocket for client I/O too.
We already have a hook that lets us do the actual recv even when using
OpenSSL, and in principle that function could do interrupt-service-like
functions if it got kicked off the recv().
Anything in this line is going to be a bigger change than I'd want to
back-patch, though. Are we OK with not fixing the problem in the back
branches? Given the shortage of field complaints, that might be all
right.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
