On 2014-07-28 15:29:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > 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.
Yea, not planning to merge it. Just wondering to make sure I understand all the implications. Another thing I'm wondering about - also not for the basic patch - is accepting termination while writing to the client. It's rather annoying that we currently don't allow to pg_terminate_backend() when writing to the client. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
