Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TCP keepalive support to libpq.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TCP keepalive support to libpq.
Date: 2010-06-24 14:13:51
Message-ID: 12503.1277388831@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 21:54 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>> This adds four additional connection parameters to libpq: keepalives,
>> keepalives_idle, keepalives_count, and keepalives_interval.
>> keepalives default to on, per discussion, but can be turned off by
>> specifying keepalives=0. The remaining parameters, where supported,
>> can be used to adjust how often keepalives are sent and how many
>> can be lost before the connection is broken.

> There isn't any need at at all for this. We can already add options on
> the libpq connection line.

> options = '-o tcp_keepalives_idle=X
> tcp_keepalives_interval=Y
> tcp_keepalives_count=Z'

Huh? The above is 100% fanciful; there was no code in libpq or anywhere
else that would have processed such a thing.

The bigger picture is that this patch is needed, not only for
walreceiver but for many other purposes --- the feature has been
requested repeatedly over the years and was already in the 9.1
commitfest queue. We moved it up because it seemed fairly important for
walreceiver's purposes, but it would have gotten done in the very near
future anyway.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-06-24 14:30:59 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TCP keepalive support to libpq.
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2010-06-24 07:10:57 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TCP keepalive support to libpq.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-06-24 14:20:10 Re: TOAST issue on custom index access method
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2010-06-24 13:47:15 Re: EOL is when?