Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Yoshiyuki Asaba <y-asaba(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?
Date: 2006-06-27 16:28:35
Message-ID: 24469.1151425715@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:23:13AM +0900, Yoshiyuki Asaba wrote:
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/823764/EN-US/

> No, it says it occurs if this condition is met: "A single *send* call or 
> *WSASend* call fills the whole underlying socket send buffer."

It also says that the condition only occurs if the program uses
non-blocking sockets ... which the backend does not.  So this page
offers no support for the proposed patch.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2006-06-27 16:29:39
Subject: Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Previous:From: Thomas HallgrenDate: 2006-06-27 16:26:14
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Pljava-dev] char with trailing space, PreparedStatement.setObject & SetString]

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Yoshiyuki AsabaDate: 2006-06-27 16:33:48
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-06-27 16:13:18
Subject: Re: SO_SNDBUF size is small on win32?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group