Patch committed.
Thanks!
--
Peter Geoghegan
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 4:41 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> Seems that way. Want to post a patch?
>
> Sure.
v1-0001-Add-CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS-to-verify_heapam.patch
Description: Binary data
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 4:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
>> Not any good one that I can see.
>
> Seems that way. Want to post a patch?
Sure. I just posted another unrelated patch for amcheck this morning, so it
seems a good day for it :)
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 4:24 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 2021, at 2:38 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > It looks like we neglect to call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() anywhere
> > inside verify_heapam.c. Is there any reason for this?
>
> Not any good one that I can see.
Seems that way. Want to
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 2:38 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> It looks like we neglect to call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() anywhere
> inside verify_heapam.c. Is there any reason for this?
Not any good one that I can see.
> Can't we just
> put a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() at the top of the outermost
I just noticed that the new heapam amcheck verification code can take
a very long time to respond to cancellations from pg_amcheck -- I saw
that it took over 2 minutes on a large database on my workstation.
It looks like we neglect to call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() anywhere
inside verify_heapam.c.
