Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
- To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:04:13 -0400
- Message-id: <435CF7ED(dot)4050103(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Tom Lane wrote:
"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:3. A pl/pgsql function stuck in a empty loop is unkillable except by killing the process on the server, which cycles the entire server. This was the behavior before the patch, btw.Hmm, that suggests we need another CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS somewhere in plpgsql. Please show the exact test case you were using.
We might be able to solve that for plpgsql, but in general we can't, ISTM. What if I write a plperl function that loops forever? We have no chance there to call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS.
cheers andrew
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- References:
- Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- From: Merlin Moncure
- Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
- Indexes: