| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Ledford <mledford(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2010-02-03 18:44:02 |
| Message-ID: | 966.1265222642@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> FWIW I think there's another problem with streaming replication here,
> which is that most data flows from client to server, so it would take
> quite some time for the threshold to be reached. Note that there's no
> size check in the libpq frontend code. Normally this is not an issue
> because the bulk of data is expected to flow in the other direction.
Huh? I thought the slaves connect to the master, rather than the other
way round?
It's true that libpq doesn't contain any such code, but that seems like
a fortunate thing right at the moment, as it limits the number of places
we might have to hack something.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2010-02-03 18:46:33 | Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings |
| Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2010-02-03 18:43:40 | Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl UPDATED [PATCH] |