From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Streaming Replication on win32 |
Date: | 2010-01-18 09:30:36 |
Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb1001180130x2e02679cib032b24eb545b84@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> This could be because the win32 socket emulation layer simply wasn't
>> designed to deal with non-blocking sockets. Specifically, it actually
>> *always* sets the socket to non-blocking mode, and then uses that to
>> properly emulate how sockets work under unix.
>
> I presume the win32 emulation layer can be taught about non-blocking
> sockets? Or maybe pq_getbyte_if_available() can be implemented using
> some other simpler method on Windows.
How about checking the socket by using select/poll before calling
pq_getbyte_if_available()? This would prevent pgwin32_recv() from
being blocked because a message is guaranteed to have already arrived.
When the renegotiation happens, SSL_read (instead of pqwin32_recv())
is called with non-blocking socket, so it's not blocked.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-01-18 09:35:01 | Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-01-18 09:30:29 | Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay |