On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > On 2016/04/13 3:14, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> I'm wondering why we are fixing this specific case and not any of the >> other calls to PQexec() or PQexecParams() in postgres_fdw.c. >> >> I mean, many of those instances are cases where the query isn't likely >> to run for very long, but certainly "FETCH %d FROM c%u" is in theory >> just as bad as the new code introduced in 9.6. In practice, it >> probably isn't, because we're probably only fetching 50 rows at a time >> rather than potentially a lot more, but if we're fixing this code up >> to be interrupt-safe, maybe we should fix it all at the same time. >> Even for the short-running queries like CLOSE and DEALLOCATE, it seems >> possible that there could be a network-related hang which you might >> want to interrupt. > > > Actually, I was wondering, too, but I didn't propose that because, as far as > I know, there are no reports from the field. But I agree with you.
For something that is HEAD-only that's a great idea to put everything into the same flag like that. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
