Re: PostgreSQL ping/pong to client

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com>
Cc: Ajay Pratap <ajaypratap(at)drishti-soft(dot)com>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL ping/pong to client
Date: 2019-04-17 17:04:20
Message-ID: 4113.1555520660@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:49 PM Ajay Pratap <ajaypratap(at)drishti-soft(dot)com> wrote:
>> Correction: I meant when my java application dies postgres should break all the connections that were associated with that peer.

> And how is the server supposed to detect that without keepalives? TCP
> is dessigned to survice for extended period of times without traffic,
> I used that a lot in the dial up times.
> And what makes you think keepalives are impactful and unrealistic? I
> use them a lot, they do not impact my workloads measurably.

If we tried to do something about that in the server code proper,
we'd basically be reinventing TCP keepalives --- probably badly.
And we couldn't do it at all without a protocol version break,
because the client-side code would also need to know about it.

Just use the keepalive facility.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2019-04-17 17:05:08 Re: Move vs. copy table between databases that share a tablespace?
Previous Message Francisco Olarte 2019-04-17 16:41:57 Re: PostgreSQL ping/pong to client