Re: Timeout parameters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Timeout parameters
Date
Msg-id 20190405070540.GC31003@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Timeout parameters  ("Jamison, Kirk" <k.jamison@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: Timeout parameters  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 04:39:36AM +0000, Jamison, Kirk wrote:
> I just checked and confirmed that the TCP USER TIMEOUT patch set v20
> works.  Although you should capitalize "linux" to "Linux" as already
> mentioned before.  The committer can also just fix that very minor
> part, if patch is deemed committable.

The first letter should be upper-case.

> Note to committer: The "Ready for Committer" status is mainly intended for
> tcp user timeout parameter.
>
> OTOH, unless there is consensus with the socket_timeout,
> for now the socket_timeout patch status still remains as "Needs Review".

I was looking at the patch set a couple of days ago.  The proposed
TCP_backend_v20.patch and TCP_interface_v20.patch make sense, but it
seems to me that socket_timeout_v14.patch should be rejected as it
could cause a connection to go down with no actual reason and that
the server should be in charge of handling timeouts.  Is my impression
right?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: A separate table level option to control compression
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum