| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised. |
| Date: | 2014-09-03 12:09:54 |
| Message-ID: | 54070512.9010807@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/03/2014 12:23 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-09-02 17:21:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
>>> I was going to suggest using WaitLatchOrSocket instead of sleeping in 1
>>> second increment, but I see that WaitLatchOrSocket() doesn't currently
>>> support waiting for a socket to become writeable, without also waiting
>>> for it to become readable. I wonder how difficult it would be to lift
>>> that restriction.
>>
>> My recollection is that there was a reason for that, but I don't recall
>> details any more.
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/e42a21b9e6c9b9e6346a34b62628d48ff2fc6ddf
>
> In my prototype I've changed the API that errors set both
> READABLE/WRITABLE. Seems to work....
Andres, would you mind posting the WIP patch you have? That could be a
better foundation for this patch.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2014-09-03 12:52:44 | Re: TODO item for protocol revision: Negotiate encryption in connection handshake |
| Previous Message | Vik Fearing | 2014-09-03 12:05:50 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #10823: Better REINDEX syntax. |