| From: | "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Michael Paquier' <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | "AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Fabien COELHO' <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu> |
| Subject: | RE: Timeout parameters |
| Date: | 2019-02-07 01:51:12 |
| Message-ID: | EDA4195584F5064680D8130B1CA91C453D6095@G01JPEXMBYT04 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Fabien,
Would you review TCP_USER_TIMEOUT patches first please?
I want to avoid the situation that
the discussion of socket_timeout has been lengthened
and tcp_user_timeout patch is also not commit in the next CF.
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:24 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Moved to next CF per the latest updates: there is a patch with no reviews for it.
Thank you.
Best regards,
---------------------
Ryohei Nagaura
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-02-07 01:51:49 | Re: Undo logs |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2019-02-07 01:47:19 | Re: pg11.1: dsa_area could not attach to segment |