On 24 April 2016 at 17:54, Shay Rojansky <roji@roji.org> wrote:
I definitely agree that simply tracking message sequence numbers on both sides is better. It's also a powerful feature to be able to cancel all messages "up to N" - I'm thinking of a scenario where, for example, many simple queries are sent and the whole process needs to be cancelled.
For security, I think any non-matching cancellation would be ignored so that only someone with proper context could issue the cancel.
Issuing bulk cancellations sounds like a bad plan.
Yes, this has been happening to some Npgsql users, it's not very frequent but it does happen from time to time. I also bumped into this in some automated testing scenarios. It's not the highest-value feature, but it is an improvement to have if you plan on working on a new protocol version.
Let me know if you'd like me to update the TODO.
If you've got an itch, expecting someone else to scratch it is less likely to succeed.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
