| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: backtrace_on_internal_error |
| Date: | 2023-12-08 22:29:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1550646.1702074585@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> I think I figured it it out. Looks like we need to translate a closed socket
>> (recvfrom() returning 0) to ECONNRESET or such.
> Seems like we should just treat errno == 0 as a reason to emit the "EOF
> detected" message?
Agreed. I think we want to do that after the initial handshake,
too, so maybe as attached.
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| handle-openssl-returning-errno-zero.patch | text/x-diff | 958 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-12-08 22:35:26 | Re: backtrace_on_internal_error |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2023-12-08 22:22:58 | Re: Row pattern recognition |