Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> If we want to have an idle_in_statement_timeout then we'll need to introduce a
> select loop instead of just directly blocking on recv anyways. Does that mean
> we may as well bite the bullet now?
If we wanted such a timeout (which I personally don't) we wouldn't
implement it with select because OpenSSL wouldn't cooperate. AFAICS
this'd require setting a timer interrupt ... and then unsetting it when
the client response comes back.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Lukas Kahwe Smith||Date: 2007-04-29 16:30:22|
|Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2007-04-29 16:25:52|
|Subject: Re: strange buildfarm failures|