From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, fgp(at)phlo(dot)org, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: beta3 & the open items list |
Date: | 2010-06-20 16:20:05 |
Message-ID: | 1277050805.5130.12.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 11:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> > Florian Pflug wrote:
> >> Yeah, I agree. Just enabling keepalive should suffice for 9.0.
>
> > +1, with configurable timeout;
>
> Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch isn't it?
Can someone tell me what we are going to do about firewalls that impose
their own rules outside of the control of the DBA?
I know that keepalive *should* work, however I also know that regardless
of keepalive I often have to restart sessions etc. There are
environments that are outside the control of the user.
Perhaps this has already been solved and I don't know about it. Does the
master<->slave relationship have a built in ping mechanism that is
outside of the TCP protocol?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Singer | 2010-06-20 16:21:20 | stats collector "connection refused" on recv of test message |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-20 15:36:56 | Re: beta3 & the open items list |