From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Shinya Kato' <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com" <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure |
Date: | 2022-01-18 15:42:05 |
Message-ID: | db3533c9-42ea-0ef4-2d70-8dfc016e02b5@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021/12/15 15:40, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com wrote:
> Yeah, remote-checking timeout will be enable even ifa local transaction is opened.
> In my understanding, postgres cannot distinguish whether opening transactions
> are using only local object or not.
> My first idea was that turning on the timeout when GetFdwRoutineXXX functions
> were called,
What about starting the timeout in GetConnection(), instead?
> I attached which implements that.
v05_0004_add_tests.patch failed to be applied to the master. Could you rebase it?
- This option is currently available only on systems that support the
- non-standard <symbol>POLLRDHUP</symbol> extension to the
- <symbol>poll</symbol> system call, including Linux.
+ This option relies on kernel events exposed by Linux, macOS, illumos
+ and the BSD family of operating systems, and is not currently available
+ on other systems.
The above change is included in both v5-0003-Use-WL_SOCKET_CLOSED-for-client_connection_check_.patch and v05_0002_add_doc.patch. If it should be in the former patch, it should be removed from your patch v05_0002_add_doc.patch.
There seems no user of UnregisterCheckingRemoteServersCallback(). So how about removing it?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | 陈佳昕 (步真) | 2022-01-18 15:49:31 | Re: 32TB relation size make mdnblocks overflow |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-01-18 15:37:53 | Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation |