Would someone generate a patch that includes all the new ideas and post it here? Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Brant wrote: > Sounds good. I'll check how much we're actually looping too. > > Pete > > >>> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/06/06 10:27 pm >>> > That's probably not a bad idea. AFAIK we haven't had reports of it > elsewhere, but it oculd happen. Want to code up a new patch, and run > some tests? > > //Magnus > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > Also, do we want to move the retry loop to pgwin32_recv? > > That seems like a good idea. I'm not sure users of recv > > should ever have to deal with WSAEWOULDBLOCK as it's not > > really an error. > > > > Pete > > > > >>> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/06/06 9:58 pm >>> > > > > Attached are two patches which in combination make > > pg_stat_activity > > > > > > work reliably for us on Windows. > > > > ... > > > > pgstat.patch removes the delayed destroy code for backends, > > > databases, > > > > and tables. Database and table entries are cleaned up > immediately > > > > > > upon receipt of the appropriate message. > > > > > > I'll go ahead and apply the delayed-destroy-removal part > > > (just to HEAD for the time being --- seems a bit risky to > > > apply it to the stable branches). The Windows-specific > > > change sounds like it may need more review. > > > > Actually, I think that's mostly me being confused and taking others > > with > > me ;-) > > > > It's definitly a problem, and we have a solution there. The one > thing > > I'm still a bit concerned about is: Do we need a > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS, > > and do we need an upper limit on the spinning. In theory we can spin > > with 100% CPU usage, which is not good. So we should either spin a > > limited amount of times, or we should perhaps introduce a tiny > delay? > > > > //Magnus > > > > ---------------------------(end of > > broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > > subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that > > your > > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > -- Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
