On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 12:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Why not SIGINT?
>
> > I must be missing something. How would I tell the difference between
> > manual and automatic cancels if we use SIGINT for both cases?
>
> Why do you need to? I thought the plan was that DeadlockCheck would
> only try to signal autovac workers.
...thinks...
On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 10:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> In short: put in the automatic lock cancel for regular vacuums, disable
> it for antiwraparound vacuums, but don't disable manual cancels; and
> definitely don't invent a complicated new set of behaviors around that.
So you mean "dont allow automatic cancels of manually submitted
VACUUMs".
I thought you meant don't disable manually-requested cancels of
autovacuums.
Can you explain further what you meant by "don't disable manual
cancels".
(laughs) wish I had a pound for every time we'd misunderstood each
other, or at least, a pound every time I misunderstood you. :-)
-- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
