On 5/12/20 8:06 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > I was doing some memory testing under fractional CPU allocations and it became > painfully obvious that the repeat() function needs CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(). > > I exchanged a few emails offlist with Tom about it, and (at the risk of > putting > words in his mouth) he agreed and felt it was a candidate for backpatching. > > Very small patch attached. Quick and dirty performance test:
<snip> > While discussing the above, Tom also wondered whether we should add unlikely() > to the CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() macro. > > Small patch for that also attached. I was not sure about the WIN32 stanza on > that (to do it or not; if so, what about the UNBLOCKED_SIGNAL_QUEUE() test). > > I tested as above with unlikely() and did not see any discernible difference, > but the added check might improve other code paths. > > Comments or objections? Seeing none ... I intend to backpatch and push these two patches in the next day or so. Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
