Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Non-blocking communication between a frontend and a backend (pqcomm)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Non-blocking communication between a frontend and a backend (pqcomm)
Date: 2009-07-21 17:20:17
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Martin Pihlak<martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Fujii Masao wrote:
>> In line with Robert's suggestion, I submit non-blocking pqcomm patch
>> as a self-contained one.
> Here's my initial review of the non-blocking pqcomm patch. The patch applies
> cleanly and passes regression. Generally looks nice and clean. Couple of remarks
> from the department of nitpicking:
> * In secure_poll() the handling of timeouts is different depending whether
>  poll(), select() or SSL_pending() is used. The latter doesn't use the
>  timeout value at all, and for select() it is impossible to specify indefinite
>  timeout.
> * occasional "blank" lines consisting of a single tab character -- maybe
>  a left-over from editor auto-indent. Not sure of how much a problem this
>  is, given that the blanks will be removed by pg_indent.
> * Comment on pq_wait() seems to have a typo: "-1 if an error directly."
> I have done limited testing on Linux i686 (HAVE_POLL only) -- the non-blocking
> functions behave as expected.

Fujii Masao,

Are you planning to update this patch based on Martin's review?


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2009-07-21 17:40:27
Subject: Re: WIP: Deferrable unique constraints
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-07-21 17:10:57
Subject: Re: Index-only-scans, indexam API changes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group