Re: beta3 & the open items list

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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