Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

* Craig Ringer (craig@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 4 April 2016 at 10:13, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
> > Async notification is the easier part, I wasn't aware that the ssl library
> > had this problem though
>
> AFAIK the issue is that even if there are bytes available on the underlying
> socket, the SSL lib doesn't know if that means there are bytes readable
> from the wrapped SSL socket. The traffic on the underlying socket could be
> renegotiation messages or whatever.
>
> We really need non-blocking reads.

That would certainly be a good way to address this, but I'm guessing
it's non-trivial to implement.

Thanks!

Stephen