From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Igal (at) Lucee(dot)org" <igal(at)lucee(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ian Barwick <ian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() |
Date: | 2016-04-04 02:17:54 |
Message-ID: | CAMsr+YGqKHZTa5w32OV9uhHkumT3a7KHDc=Vi04WYZrLoSg+-g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4 April 2016 at 10:13, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
> Async notification is the easier part, I wasn't aware that the ssl library
> had this problem though
>
>
AFAIK the issue is that even if there are bytes available on the underlying
socket, the SSL lib doesn't know if that means there are bytes readable
from the wrapped SSL socket. The traffic on the underlying socket could be
renegotiation messages or whatever.
We really need non-blocking reads.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-04-04 02:19:12 | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2016-04-04 02:13:50 | Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key() |