Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1

From: Rob Butler <crodster2k(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: andrew(at)supernews(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
Date: 2005-05-02 19:29:33
Message-ID: 20050502192933.43372.qmail@web54010.mail.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> One way to handle this is to have an option, set by
> the client, that
> causes the server to send some ignorable message
> after a given period
> of time idle while waiting for the client. If the
> idleness was due to
> network partitioning or similar failure, then this
> ensures that the
> connection breaks within a known time. This is safer
> than simply having
> the backend abort after a given idle period.

Another option is to have the client driver send some
ignorable message instead of the server. If the
server doesn't get a message every timeout
minutes/seconds + slop factor, then it drops the
connection. So libpq, JDBC, .net etc would all have
to have this implemented, but the changes to the
server would probably be simpler this way, wouldn't they?

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2005-05-02 19:31:44 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement
Previous Message Robert Treat 2005-05-02 19:28:18 Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement