Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> No, I meant the earlier patch which you rejected with the flag in MyProc. I
> realize there were other issues but the initial concern was that it wouldn't
> respond promptly because it would wait for CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS.
No, that's not the concern in the least. The concern is that something
could trap the attempted throwing of the error *after*
CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS has noticed the signal.
regards, tom lane
