Hi,
On 2018-10-19 13:45:42 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-19 13:36:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > If we're willing to accept a ProcDie interrupt during secure_read at all,
> > I don't see why not to do it even if we got some data. We'll accept the
> > interrupt anyway the next time something happens to do
> > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS; and it's unlikely that that would not be till after
> > we'd completed the query, so the net effect is just going to be that we
> > waste some cycles first.
>
> I don't immediately see a problem with changing this for reads.
One argument against changing it, although not a very strong one, is
that processing a proc die even when non-blocking prevents us from
processing commands like a client's X/terminate even if we already have
the necessary input.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
