RE: Timeout parameters

From: "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Michael Paquier' <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Fabien COELHO' <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, 'Kyotaro HORIGUCHI' <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com" <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>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Timeout parameters
Date: 2019-04-08 04:32:34
Message-ID: EDA4195584F5064680D8130B1CA91C454128AC@G01JPEXMBYT04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi, Michael-san.

> From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz]
> I have just committed the GUC and libpq portion for TCP_USER_TIMEOUT after a
> last lookup, and I have cleaned up a couple of places. It is a bit disappointing
> to see the option supported on Linux, but not on Windows, Solaris and BSD as
> far as I can see. Still that's useful in itself for more control of the TCP
> connection. Hopefully I forgot nobody in the review credits.
I confirmed your commitment. Thank you.

> I am marking the CF entry as committed. In the future, it would be better to
> not propose multiple concepts on the same thread, and if the socket_timeout
> business is resubmitted, I would suggest a completely new CF entry, and a new
> thread.
Thank you for your suggestion.
I think it would be better too.

Best regards,
Ryohei Nagaura

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2019-04-08 04:37:16 Re: Back-branch bugs with fully-prunable UPDATEs
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2019-04-08 03:59:10 Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table