From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] listening addresses |
Date: | 2004-03-21 16:46:16 |
Message-ID: | 405DC6D8.4040100@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>A small problem with it was reported to me a couple of days ago - user
>>had firewalled off all IP6 traffic. The stats collector happily bound
>>and connected to the socket, but all the packets fell in the bit bucket.
>>They found it quite hard to diagnose the problem.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Possible solutions that occurred to me:
>>. an initial "hello"-"yes i'm here" exchange to validate the address
>>
>>
>
>That one seems reasonable to me. Seems like it would take just a few
>more lines of code in the loop that tries to find a working socket to
>check that we can send a byte and receive it. You'd have to be careful
>not to block if the socket is indeed not working ... also, is it safe to
>assume that a byte sent with send() is *immediately* ready to recv()?
>
>
>
This patch attempts to implement the idea, with safety in case the
packet is not immediately available.
comments welcome
cheers
andrew
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
stats.patch | text/plain | 1.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-21 17:23:39 | Re: [HACKERS] listening addresses |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-21 16:39:49 | Re: Unbalanced Btree Indices ... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-03-21 16:58:23 | listening addresses |
Previous Message | Claudio Natoli | 2004-03-21 09:36:34 | win32 build patch |