Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: PQcancel does not use tcp_user_timeout, connect_timeout and keepalive settings

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Jelte Fennema <Jelte(dot)Fennema(at)microsoft(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: PQcancel does not use tcp_user_timeout, connect_timeout and keepalive settings
Date: 2022-01-05 18:54:49
Message-ID: 794237.1641408889@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2021-12-28 15:49:00 +0000, Jelte Fennema wrote:
>> Finally, I would love it if once these fixes are merged the would also be backpatched to
>> previous versions of libpq.

> I'm not really convinced this is a good patch to backpatch. There does seem to
> be some potential for subtle breakage - code in signal handlers is notoriously
> finnicky, it's a rarely exercised code path, etc. It's also not fixing
> something that previously worked.

IMO, this is a new feature not a bug fix, and as such it's not backpatch
material ... especially if we don't have 100.00% confidence in it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-01-05 18:56:25 Re: Are we missing a dot in initdb's output?
Previous Message Fabrízio de Royes Mello 2022-01-05 18:50:52 Re: Converting WAL to SQL