On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 13:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Can you explain further what you meant by "don't disable manual > > cancels". > > I meant that pg_cancel_backend() should still work on autovac workers, > contrary to Alvaro's suggestion that autovac workers should sometimes > ignore SIGINT. > > Basically the implementation vision I have is that the SIGINT catcher in > an autovac worker should remain stupid, and any intelligence involved > should be on the side where we're deciding whether to send a signal or > not. This probably does involve exposing more state in PGPROC but I see > nothing much wrong with that. (It might be time to merge inVacuum, > isAutovacuum, and the additional state into a bitwise vacuumFlags field.)
Gotcha -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
