Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Oh, I think we need to fix that, I'm thinking of doing a select() in the > loop to check that the socket hasn't been closed yet. I meant we don't > need to try reading the 'X' to tell apart e.g a network problem from a > standby that's s

Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > 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/walrece

Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas 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 tr

Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > wrote: >> I don't think we need to treat 'X' differently from EOF. You get an >> error anyway if the write() fails. That's actually a bit annoying, you >> get a "could not send data to client" error in the log every time a >

Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: >> Hi Heikki, >> >> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/heikki/postgres.git;a=commit;h=ebaa89ce8906e0ec45f105d083a0360b1f8bc7ca >> >> You dropped all the ACKs from walreceiver to walsender. I have no objection >> t

Re: [HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Fujii Masao wrote: > Hi Heikki, > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/heikki/postgres.git;a=commit;h=ebaa89ce8906e0ec45f105d083a0360b1f8bc7ca > > You dropped all the ACKs from walreceiver to walsender. I have no objection > to that, but I think that walsender should handle at least 'X' (wh

[HACKERS] ACK from walreceiver to walsender

2010-01-08 Thread Fujii Masao
Hi Heikki, http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/heikki/postgres.git;a=commit;h=ebaa89ce8906e0ec45f105d083a0360b1f8bc7ca You dropped all the ACKs from walreceiver to walsender. I have no objection to that, but I think that walsender should handle at least 'X' (which means that the standby is c