RE: Timeout parameters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tsunakawa, Takayuki
Subject RE: Timeout parameters
Date
Msg-id 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FBF29A9@G01JPEXMBYT05
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Timeout parameters  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.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. 

Thank you for further cleanup and committing.


> For the socket_timeout stuff, its way of solving the problem it thinks is
> solves does not seem right to me, and this thread has not reached a consensus
> anyway, so I have discarded the issue.
> 
> 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.

Understood.  Looking back the review process, it seems that tcp_user_timeout and socket_timeout should have been
handledin separate threads.
 


Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: clean up pg_checksums.sgml