Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> > Oh I see. But this seems to change the behabior significantly
> > at least for die signals.
>
> Well, it considerably reduces the number of places at which either
> signal will be accepted, but that's exactly the point. The code
> as written was accepting the signals in many more places than we
> envisioned in the original discussion, and I'm unconvinced that
> that's safe.
>
> AFAIK this should at worst increase the interrupt response time
> from order-of-microseconds to order-of-milliseconds, so I'm not
> especially worried. Sub-second response time is plenty good enough
> for either kind of interrupt, IMHO.
When are cancel or die interrupts accepted while
executing a long query ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
