RE: Timeout parameters

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
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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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