Re: 12.1 not useable: clientlib fails after a dozen queries (GSSAPI ?)

From: Peter <pmc(at)citylink(dot)dinoex(dot)sub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: 12.1 not useable: clientlib fails after a dozen queries (GSSAPI ?)
Date: 2020-01-12 18:36:33
Message-ID: 20200112183633.GA93629@gate.oper.dinoex.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:51:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
! Here's a draft patch that cleans up all the logic errors I could find.

Okiee, thank You!
Let's see (was a bit busy yesterday trying to upgrade pgadmin3 -
difficult matter), now lets sort this out:

With the first patch applied (as from Friday - applied only on the
client side), the application did appear to work well.

But then, when engaging bandwidth-limiting to some modem-speed, it did
not work: psql would receive all (or most of) the data from a SELECT,
but then somehow not recognize the end of it and sit there and wait for
whatever:

> flowmdev=> select * from flows;
> ^CCancel request sent
> ^CCancel request sent

Now with the new patches 0001+0003 applied, on both server & client,
all now running 12.1 release, on a first run I did not perceive
a malfunction, bandwidth limited or not.
I'll leave them applied, but this here will not experience serious
loads; You'll need somebody else to test for that...

rgds,
PMc

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-01-12 19:46:25 Re: 12.1 not useable: clientlib fails after a dozen queries (GSSAPI ?)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-01-11 21:42:31 Re: 12.1 not useable: clientlib fails after a dozen queries (GSSAPI ?)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2020-01-12 19:11:13 Re: [Proposal] Add accumulated statistics for wait event
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-01-12 17:06:06 Re: our checks for read-only queries are not great