On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Daniel Farina <dan...@heroku.com> wrote: >> Context diff equivalent attached. > > Thanks for the patch! > > As I said before, the timeout which this patch provides doesn't work well > when the walsender gets blocked in sending WAL. At first, we would > need to implement a non-blocking write function as an infrastructure > of the replication timeout, I think. > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTi%3DPu2ne%3DVO-%2BCLMXLQh9y85qumLCbBP15CjnyUS%40mail.gmail.com
Interesting point...if that's accepted as required-for-commit, what are the perceptions of the odds that, presuming I can write the code quickly enough, that there's enough infrastructure/ports already in postgres to allow for a non-blocking write on all our supported platforms? -- fdr -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
