On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > There's no guarantee walreceiver will read the 'X' before trying to > write() to the socket, so we can't rely on that to determine whether to > suppress the "could not send data to client" message.
s/walreceiver/walsender? > We could try to read() from the socket after the write() has failed, to > see if there's an 'X' message pending. Not sure it's worth it. I think > we would have to put the socket into non-blocking mode before the > read(), to avoid blocking if the write() failed for some other reason. > Or select() to see if there's incoming data. I'm inclined to just not > bother.. Umm.. if no action is taken, walsender process would remain until it tries to write to the socket in that case. Is this OK? I think that this is more problematic rather than output of the "could not send data to client" message. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
