Message-ID: <6dda529d-e738-33ad-1d2e-0f26e4f803cc@dalibo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2023 10:01:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Add non-blocking version of PQcancel
To: Jelte Fennema <postgres@jeltef.nl>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
 "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark.cfm@gmail.com>,
 Jelte Fennema <Jelte.Fennema@microsoft.com>,
 Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Peter Eisentraut
 <peter@eisentraut.org>, Jacob Champion <jchampion@timescale.com>,
 Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
References: <CAGECzQR57o1wdo9fG7grmmabrt1jotHR-T=nQZGXiZRHpvgrGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM-w4HOf4+em6TivqZXtbVvpahHRYExxosK5eAyje5C+dSxWSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <2755358.1678816706@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAM-w4HPyCqVuf=fR-VBB1xcCtUF0+cefpVOv29O-JYbAG4dh2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGECzQR7kRY3WKKwx0FdmAA3P2vD+SGALOcXV-dcqMwM4LHV8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGECzQTaGtAWmM98q9uup2pjODR8WSOsF_UV3YG7THoqatJApA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230328145318.upvrlslcbjyh47ce@dalibo.com>
 <CAGECzQQUw3UFP8ivMYg0tt3-vDscSZMRuwpABjkUO2m9=JUSTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230329084314.higpoqp4aqpkg5iq@dalibo.com>
 <CAGECzQRsOobw4BYbbk08rhxG9FJRRja7=Vn9+EpYA=UG_Bd6NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZCVDQDMOpvr0aAzm@dalibo.com>
 <CAGECzQQUztNMJnsM7KXbbCnO9vFaiiwvDHsfPU_wF9Un19bikA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: fr, en-GB
From: Denis Laxalde <denis.laxalde@dalibo.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGECzQQUztNMJnsM7KXbbCnO9vFaiiwvDHsfPU_wF9Un19bikA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/6dda529d-e738-33ad-1d2e-0f26e4f803cc%40dalibo.com>
Precedence: bulk

The patch set does not apply any more.

I tried to rebase locally; even leaving out 1 ("libpq: Run pgindent 
after a9e9a9f32b3"), patch 4 ("Start using new libpq cancel APIs") is 
harder to resolve following 983ec23007b (I suppose).

Appart from that, the implementation in v19 sounds good to me, and seems 
worthwhile. FWIW, as said before, I also implemented it in Psycopg in a 
sort of an end-to-end validation.