Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTik660MswsoZUR9Urtt3aWO5AVr5StpcUQXD1CNj@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq
Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> Which brings us to the question of portability. A quick search around >> the Internet suggests that this is supported on recent versions of >> Linux, Free/OpenBSD, AIX, and HP/UX, and it appears to work on my Mac >> also. I'm not clear how long it's been implemented on each of these >> platforms, though. With respect to Windows, it looks like there are >> registry settings for all of these parameters, but I'm unclear whether >> they can be set on a per-connection basis and what's required to make >> this happen. > > I looked around quickly earlier when we chatted about this, and I > think I found an API call to change them for a socket as well - but a > Windows specific one, not the ones you'd find on Unix... That, in itself, doesn't bother me, especially if you're willing to write and test a patch that uses them. What does bother me is the fact that we are engineering a critical aspect of our system reliability around vendor-specific implementation details of the TCP stack, and that if any version of any operating system that we support (or ever wish to support in the future) fails to have a reliable implementation of this feature AND configurable knobs that we can tune to suit our needs, then we're screwed. Does anyone want to argue that this is NOT a house of cards? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: