Re: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kyotaro Horiguchi
Subject Re: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure
Date
Msg-id 20230209.113149.2028095933259376311.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure  ("Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure
List pgsql-hackers
At Fri, 27 Jan 2023 06:57:01 +0000, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote in 
> I found cfbot failure, PSA fixed version.

+       Unlike <xref linkend="libpq-PQstatus"/>, this function checks socket
+       health. This check is performed by polling the socket. This function is
+       currently available only on systems that support the non-standard
+       <symbol>POLLRDHUP</symbol> extension to the <symbol>poll</symbol> system

I find it quite confusing that we have pqSocketCheck and PQconnCheck,
that does almost the same thing.. Since pqSocketCheck is a static
function, we can modify the function as we like.

I still don't understand why we need pqconnCheck_internal separate
from pqSocketPoll(), and PQconnCheck from pqSocketCheck.


https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/TYAPR01MB58665BF23D38EDF10028DE2AF5299%40TYAPR01MB5866.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com#47d21431bf9fa94f763c824f6e81fa54
> IIUC, pqSocketCheck () calls pqSocketPoll(),
> and in the pqSocketPoll() we poll()'d the POLLIN or POLLOUT event.
> But according to [1], we must wait POLLRDHUP event,
> so we cannot reuse it straightforward.

Yeah, I didn't suggest to use the function as-is. Couldn't we extend
the fucntion by letting it accept end_time = 0 && !forRead &&
!forWrite, not causing side effects?

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Shinoda, Noriyoshi (PN Japan FSIP)"
Date:
Subject: RE: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL test scenario in 003_check_guc.pl