Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:56 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Also, man that CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() looks like trouble.
>> Could we take that out?
> Maybe I'm missing something, but why wouldn't that be a horrible idea?
> We do not want to have long waits where we refuse to respond to
> interrupts.
It might be appropriate for some of the callers to do it. But I don't
see any great argument why ProcWaitForSignal itself has to do it.
regards, tom lane
