On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:52:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Robert Haas wrote: > >> A colleague at EnterpriseDB today ran into a situation on PostgreSQL > >> 9.3.5 where the server went into an infinite loop while attempting a > >> VACUUM FREEZE; it couldn't escape _bt_getstackbuf(), and it couldn't > >> be killed with ^C. I think we should add a check for interrupts into > >> that loop somewhere; > > > Our design principle in this area is that all loops should have > > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() calls somewhere, so that even if data is horribly > > corrupted you can get out of it. > > FWIW, I concur with Alvaro that adding a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() needn't > require much discussion.
+1 > Given the lack of prior complaints about this > loop, I'm not sure I see the need to work harder than that; corruption > of this sort must be quite rare. Looks like _bt_getstackbuf() is always called with some buffer lock held, so CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() alone would not help: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/16519.1401395...@sss.pgh.pa.us -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
