Re: Timeout parameters

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 07:34:48AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz]
>> The first letter should be upper-case.
>
> Thank you for taking care of this patch, and sorry to cause you
> trouble to fix that...

I have just committed the GUC and libpq portion for TCP_USER_TIMEOUT
after a last lookup, and I have cleaned up a couple of places.  It is
a bit disappointing to see the option supported on Linux, but not on
Windows, Solaris and BSD as far as I can see.  Still that's useful in
itself for more control of the TCP connection.  Hopefully I forgot
nobody in the review credits.

For the socket_timeout stuff, its way of solving the problem it thinks
is solves does not seem right to me, and this thread has not reached a
consensus anyway, so I have discarded the issue.

I am marking the CF entry as committed.  In the future, it would be
better to not propose multiple concepts on the same thread, and if the
socket_timeout business is resubmitted, I would suggest a completely
new CF entry, and a new thread.
--
Michael