From: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Use array as object (src/fe_utils/parallel_slot.c) |
Date: | 2022-08-26 16:54:26 |
Message-ID: | CAEudQArxKKaJENYohrbHP5KNV5WosiEVYDANFBXyjzk-pJ0cSQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em dom., 21 de ago. de 2022 às 21:15, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
escreveu:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 02:22:32PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > If you trace the history back to a17923204, you'll see a comment about
> the
> > "zeroth slot", which makes it clear that the first slot it what's
> intended.
> >
> > I agree that it would be clearer if this were written as
> slots[0].connection.
>
> Based on the way the code is written on HEAD, this would be the
> correct assumption. Now, calling PQgetCancel() would return NULL for
> a connection that we actually ignore in the code a couple of lines
> above when it has PGINVALID_SOCKET. So it seems to me that the
> suggestion of using "cancelconn", which would be the first valid
> connection, rather than always the first connection, which may be
> using an invalid socket, is correct, so as we always have our hands
> on a way to cancel a command.
>
Thanks Michael, for looking at this.
Is it worth creating a commiffest?
regards,
Ranier Vilela
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-08-26 17:16:15 | Re: pg_has_role's handling of ADMIN OPTION is pretty weird |
Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2022-08-26 16:36:11 | Re: SQL/JSON features for v15 |