Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> writes: > I think it's going to be an uphill battle convincing TCP that we know > better than the TCP spec about how aggressive it should be about > throwing errors and killing connections. Once we have TCP keepalives > set low enough -- assuming the OS will allow it to be set much lower > -- we'll find that other timeouts are longer than we expect too. TCP > Keepalives won't come into it at all if there is any unacked data > pending -- TCP *will* detect that case but it might take longer than > you want too and you won't be able to lower it.
So it's a good thing that walreceiver never has to send anything after the initial handshake ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers