| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>, adnandursun(at)asrinbilisim(dot)com(dot)tr, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 |
| Date: | 2005-05-02 05:56:38 |
| Message-ID: | 11077.1115013398@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not convinced that Postgres ought to provide
>> a way to second-guess the TCP stack ...
> Would you be ok with a patch that allowed configuration of the
> TCP_KEEPCNT / TCP_KEEPIDLE / TCP_KEEPINTVL socket options on backend
> sockets?
[ shrug... ] As long as it doesn't fail to build on platforms that
don't offer those options, I couldn't complain too hard. But do we
really need all that?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2005-05-02 06:00:08 | Re: SPI bug. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-02 05:35:14 | Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-02 06:01:14 | Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-02 05:35:14 | Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 |