Re: Keepalives win32
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Keepalives win32 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTim72g1NL89h_VaYzg4XjR0_H8sRFzTgKGQkjTh5@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Keepalives win32 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Keepalives win32
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 16:27, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> Do you have an opinion on the two choices for handling keepalives_idle >> and keepalives_interval? They basically are: > >> 1) When not configured, use system defaults. When only one of the two >> parameters configured, use RFC default for the other one (overwrite >> system default). > >> 2) When not configured, use RFC defaults (overwrite system defaults). >> When only one of the two parameters configured, use RFC default for >> the other one (overwrite system default) > >> 3) When not configured, use system defaults. When only one of the two >> parameters configured, throw error. > > It's hard to argue about this when most of us have no idea what these > "system defaults" are, or whether they really are any different from the > RFC values in the first place, or whether ordinary users know how to > alter them or even find out their values. Please provide some > background if you want intelligent comments. The system defaults are whatever the user has configured at a machine level (by editing the registry, by hand or by tool (including policies)). I doubt many users have configured them by hand. There may well be tools that do it for them. Anyway, after some checking i realized #3 can't be implemented anyway in the backend, since guc won't let us know early enough. So that's out. Thus, let's go with #2. Which was your suggestion :) -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: