| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oleksandr Shulgin <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq copy error handling busted |
| Date: | 2020-06-04 09:04:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLMPoyUaJ2XcJFQ+wnFxHTEDXhV5ZdBLjSmbHqwPvsQQw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 6:22 PM Oleksandr Shulgin
<oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 5:37 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Here's what I tested. First, I put this into pgdata/postgresql.conf:
> Would it be feasible to capture this in a sort of a regression (TAP?) test?
If I'm remembering correctly, it wouldn't work on Windows. After
you've had an error sending to a socket, you can't receive (even if
there was something sent to you earlier). At least that's how it
seemed from the experiments on that other thread. The other problem
is that it requires inserting a sleep into the code...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jerome Wagner | 2020-06-04 09:37:54 | Re: question regarding copyData containers |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2020-06-04 08:35:09 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |