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

Re: Streaming Replication on win32

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming Replication on win32
Date: 2010-01-18 09:40:11
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:30, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 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.

SSL_read calls into pqwin32_recv(), so you have the same problem. (see
my_sock_read() and my_sock_write() in be-secure.c)

 Magnus Hagander

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-18 10:02:29
Subject: Re: Clearing global statistics
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2010-01-18 09:35:01
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay

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