| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: check for interrupts in set_rtable_names |
| Date: | 2015-11-13 23:36:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1zdqb1a990faVY5POB3J6kbFQBBVd6z0aDsH-=e1eFf1A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Someone sent my server a deranged query, it tripped my
>> auto_explain.log_min_duration setting, that hit some kind of
>> pathological case while assigning aliases, and now it sits
>> uninterruptibly in set_rtable_names for hours.
>
>> Is there any reason we can't check for interrupts in set_rtable_names,
>> like the attached?
>
> There's probably no reason not to do that, but I'd be much more interested
> in eliminating the slowness to begin with ...
I was thinking about that as well, but I don't think that would be
back-patchable, at least not the way I was envisioning it.
I was thinking of detecting bad cases (had to count to over 10 before
finding a novel name, more than 10 times) and then switching from an
object-local count, to a global count, for the numbers to add to the
name. But that would be a behavior change under some conditions.
I think the code says it clearer than prose, so crude first attempt at
that attached.
Cheers,
Jeff
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| rtable_names_faster.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2015-11-14 00:16:29 | Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow() |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-11-13 23:13:52 | Re: check for interrupts in set_rtable_names |