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