Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.

From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
Cc: hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.
Date: 2014-10-10 06:48:56
Message-ID: 20141010.154856.252680989.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hmm.. Sorry for my stupidity.

> Why is that necessary? It seems really rather wrong to make
> BIO_set_retry_write() dependant on ProcDiePending? Especially as, at
> least in my testing, it's not even required because the be_tls_write()
> can just check the error properly?

I mistook the previous conversation as it doesn't work as
expected. I confirmed that it works fine.

After all, it works as I expected. The parameter for
ProcessClientWriteInterrupt() looks somewhat uneasy but the patch
4 looks fine as a whole. Do you have anything to worry about in
the patch?

regards,

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2014-10-10 06:58:13 Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2014-10-10 04:51:25 Re: [9.4 bug] The database server hangs with write-heavy workload on Windows