Re: WaitLatchOrSocket API needs more thought for socket error conditions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WaitLatchOrSocket API needs more thought for socket error conditions
Date: 2012-05-13 18:11:52
Message-ID: 18486.1336932712@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I think that we might have avoided accepting the poll()-based
> implementation in the first place if these subtleties were considered
> earlier, since IIRC the justification for introducing it was rather
> weak.

I'm not exactly sure that the select-based implementation isn't buggy
too. It just ignores the possibility of error conditions on the
socket(s). In any case, we are using poll interchangeably with select
in most places.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-05-13 19:03:36 Re: Foreign keys in pgbench
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-05-13 18:02:34 Re: WaitLatchOrSocket API needs more thought for socket error conditions