| From: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dim(at)tapoueh(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Built-in connection pooler |
| Date: | 2019-07-29 16:19:08 |
| Message-ID: | 1ff75ebe-83e6-2440-6504-d4866afd7aae@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27.07.2019 14:49, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 2:04 AM Konstantin Knizhnik
> <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>> I have committed patch which emulates epoll EPOLLET flag and so should
>> avoid busy loop with poll().
>> I will be pleased if you can check it at FreeBSD box.
> I tried your v12 patch and it gets stuck in a busy loop during make
> check. You can see it on Linux with ./configure ...
> CFLAGS="-DWAIT_USE_POLL".
>
>
> --
> Thomas Munro
> https://enterprisedb.com
New version of the patch is attached which fixes poll() and Win32
implementations of WaitEventSet.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| builtin_connection_proxy-13.patch | text/x-patch | 136.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2019-07-29 16:35:25 | Re: should there be a hard-limit on the number of transactions pending undo? |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2019-07-29 16:14:27 | Re: Built-in connection pooler |