On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 08:01:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Thoughts?  Is there anything about this that might be unsafe?  Should
> QueryCancel be set after *any* failure of recv() or send(), or only
> if certain errno codes are detected (and if so, which ones)?

Stevens identifies some errno codes that are not significant;
in particular, EINTR, EAGAIN, and EWOULDBLOCK.  Of these, maybe
only the first occurs on a blocking socket.

Nathan Myers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com

In response to

• Idea: quicker abort after loss of client connection at 2001-06-06 00:01:02 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: Idea: quicker abort after loss of client connection at 2001-06-06 21:26:44 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Peter Eisentraut	Date: 2001-06-06 19:43:53
	Subject: And what about that Debugfile?
Previous:	From: The Hermit Hacker	Date: 2001-06-06 19:08:15
	Subject: Re: Dual-CPU slower then Single under HP?