From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Keepalives win32 |
Date: | 2010-06-28 19:03:39 |
Message-ID: | 2082.1277751819@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 20:45, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I vote for #2. It's the least inconsistent --- we don't pay attention
>> to the registry for much of anything else, do we?
> Directly, no? Indirectly, we do. For every other TCP parameter
> (because the registry controls what we'll get as the default when we
> "just use things")
Not if we make the code use the RFC values as the defaults. I'm
envisioning the GUC assign hooks doing something like
#ifdef WIN32
if (newval == 0)
newval = RFC-specified-default;
#endif
so that the main GUC logic can still think that zero means "use the
default". We're just redefining where the default comes from.
This would be a change from previous behavior, but so what?
Implementing any functionality at all here is a change from previous
behavior on Windows. I don't have the slightest problem with saying
"as of 9.0, set these values via postgresql.conf, not the registry".
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2010-06-28 19:03:45 | Re: Keepalives win32 |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-28 19:03:24 | Re: Propose Beta3 for July |