Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > One thing I am wondering about around this is: Why are we only > processing catchup events when DoingCommandRead? There's other paths > where we can wait for data from the client for a long time. Obviously we > don't want to process async.c stuff from inside copy, but I don't see > why that's the case for sinval.c.
It might be all right to do it during copy, but I'd just as soon treat that as a separate issue. If you merge it into the basic patch then it might be hard to get rid of if there are problems. 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