Re: walsender doesn't send keepalives when writes are pending
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: walsender doesn't send keepalives when writes are pending |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140214125859.GB20375@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: walsender doesn't send keepalives when writes are pending (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: walsender doesn't send keepalives when writes are
pending
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-02-14 12:55:06 +0000, Greg Stark wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > There's no reason not > > to ask for a ping when we're writing. > Is there a reason to ask for a ping? The point of keepalives is to > ensure there's some traffic on idle connections so that if the > connection is dead it doesn't linger forever and so that any on-demand > links (or more recently NAT routers or stateful firewalls) don't time > out and disconnect and have to reconnect (or more recently just fail > outright). This ain't TCP keepalives. The reason is that we want to kill walsenders if they haven't responded to a ping inside wal_sender_timeout. That's rather important e.g. for sychronous replication, so we can quickly fall over to the next standby. In such scenarios you'll usually want a timeout *far* below anything TCP provides. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: