Horton

Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, torikoshia <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Étienne BERSAC <etienne.bersac@dalibo.com>, ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com, rafaelthca@gmail.com, jian.universality@gmail.com
Date: 2024-02-23T04:52:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. ecpg: Catch zero-length Unicode identifiers correctly

  2. Improve warning message in pg_signal_backend()

  3. Add assert to ensure that page locks don't participate in deadlock cycle.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 6:25 AM James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is potentially a bit of a wild idea, but I wonder if having some
> kind of argument to CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() signifying we're in
> "normal" as opposed to "critical" (using that word differently than
> the existing critical sections) would be worth it.

It's worth considering, but the definition of "normal" vs. "critical"
might be hard to pin down. Or, we might end up with a definition that
is specific to this particular case and not generalizable to others.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com