Re: listening addresses - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: listening addresses
Date
Msg-id 405C77F1.8030506@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: listening addresses  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>also, is it safe to
>assume that a byte sent with send() is *immediately* ready to recv()?
>
>  
>

If not presumably you could either sleep for a very small interval 
before the recv or select on the socket for a very small interval. Half 
a second should be ample, I would think.

This doesn't strike me as a high priority item, but possibly worth 
putting on the TODO list? Or I could just include it when I get around 
to the rest of the listening address stuff we discussed earlier.

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: listening addresses
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: Syntax error reporting (was Re: [PATCHES] syntax error position