On 26 January 2017 at 19:20, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2017-01-26 12:24:44 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> > Currently a waiting standby doesn't allow interrupts.
>> >
>> > Patch implements that.
>> >
>> > Barring objection, patching today with backpatches.
>> "today" is a little quick, but the patch looks fine.  I doubt anyone's
>> going to screech too loud about adding a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() call.
> I don't quite get asking for agreement, and then not waiting as
> suggested.  I'm personally fine with going with a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS
> for now, but I think it'd better to replace it with a latch.

I have waited, so not sure what you mean. Tomorrow is too late.

Replacing with a latch wouldn't be backpatchable, IMHO.

I've no problem if you want to work on a deeper fix for future versions.

Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to