On 2015-12-29 11:07:26 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> In passing, the patch gets rid of a vestigial CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()
> call; it was added by e710b65c and IMO should have been removed again
> by 6647248e. There's certainly no very good reason to have one right
> at that spot anymore.
Why? Doesn't seem like the worst place for an explicit interrupt check?
I think we don't really have a problem with too many such checks... We
surely could move it, but I don't really see how it's related to the
topic at hand nor do I think it's really worth pondering about
extensively.
Andres
