Horton

Re: repeat() function, CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(), and unlikely()

Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Date: 2020-05-28T17:23:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 5/27/20 3:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I think that each of those tests should have a separate unlikely() marker,
>> since the whole point here is that we don't expect either of those tests
>> to yield true in the huge majority of CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS executions.
> 
> +1.  I am not sure that the addition of unlikely() should be
> backpatched though, that's not something usually done.


I backpatched and pushed the changes to the repeat() function. Any other
opinions regarding backpatch of the unlikely() addition to CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()?

Joe

-- 
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development

Commits

  1. Add unlikely() to CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()

  2. Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() to the repeat() function