Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly?
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABUevExbzb=bDV6SDVTW=ZmZgQi9hp1HLhdvvLuc-ErcjB=u9A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly?
Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> I wonder if we ought to backport this further: e.g. walsender
> continously uses nonblocking sockets via pq_getbyte_if_available(). On
> the other hand I can't immediately see a problem with that, besides
> differing messages on windows/the rest of the world.
I'm slightly worried about breaking 3rd-party code that might be using
recv() and somehow expecting the current behavior. However, it's equally
arguable that such code would have Windows-specific problems that would be
fixed by the patch. Now that we've seen a successful round of buildfarm
results, I'd be okay with back-patching 90e61df8 personally.
Any other opinions out there?
Maybe holdoff until the release with the new code has been out for a while, but make sure we get it into the next set of minors? That'll give us at least some real world deployment to notice any issues with it?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: