From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: Julien Rouhaud <julien.rouhaud@dalibo.com>,
        pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call
In-reply-to: <20170726012641.bmhfcp5ajpudihl6@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <b0af9eaa-130c-60d0-9e4e-7a135b1e0c76@dalibo.com>
 <12302.1500132157@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20170717072629.dqykbsot2irdob7c@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20170717145710.cm32m4yn555hsoxd@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <6687.1500411223@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20170721114023.fj6cvr6og46yogei@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <19899.1500682674@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20170724161954.gbqswhukk7c4lygt@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <32759.1500917278@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20170726012641.bmhfcp5ajpudihl6@alap3.anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Tue, 25 Jul 2017 18:26:41 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <20854.1501095817.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 15:03:37 -0400
Message-ID: <20855.1501095817@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> I've moved the CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() to the callsites. That
> unsurprisingly ends up being somewhat verbose, and there's a bunch of
> minor judgement calls where exactly to place them. While doing so I've
> also added a few extra ones.  Did this in a separate patch to make it
> easier to review.

Hm, that seems kinda backwards to me; I was envisioning the checks
moving to the callees not the callers.  I think it'd end up being
about the same number of occurrences of CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(),
and there would be less of a judgment call about where to put them.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers