RE: Timeout parameters

From: "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Fabien COELHO' <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Robert Haas' <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu>, "AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Timeout parameters
Date: 2019-03-28 01:11:23
Message-ID: EDA4195584F5064680D8130B1CA91C4540EEAD@G01JPEXMBYT04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello, Fabien-san.

> From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
> About the backend v11 patch.
> No space or newline before ";". Same comment about the libpq_ timeout.

> There is an error in the code, I think it should be < 0 to detect errors.
Yes, thanks!

> If the parameter has no effect on Windows, I do not see why its value should be
> constrained to zero, it should just have no effect. Idem libpq_ timeout.
I had a misunderstanding.
Indeed, it doesn't need to be zero. Removed.

> Documentation:
> ISTM this is not about libpq connections but about TCP connections. There can be
> non libpq implementations client side.
Then, where do you think the correct place?
I thought that this parameter should be explained here because the communication
will be made through the library libpq same as keepalive features.

Best regards,
Ryohei Nagaura

Attachment Content-Type Size
socket_timeout_v9.patch application/octet-stream 5.2 KB
TCP_backend_v12.patch application/octet-stream 5.4 KB
TCP_interface_v12.patch application/octet-stream 4.5 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2019-03-28 01:34:43 Re: Ordered Partitioned Table Scans
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2019-03-27 23:57:17 Re: amcheck verification for GiST