RE: Timeout parameters

From: Nagaura, Ryohei [mailto:nagaura.ryohei@jp.fujitsu.com]
> BTW, tcp_user_timeout parameter of servers and clients have same name in
> my current implementation.
> I think it would be better different name rather than same name.
> I'll name them as the following a) or b):
> 	a) server_tcp_user_timeout and client_tcp_user_timeout
> 	b) tcp_user_timeout and user_timeout
> b) is the same as the naming convention of keepalive, but it is not
> user-friendly.
> Do you come up with better name?
> Or opinion?

a) is not always accurate, because libpq is also used in the server.  For example, postgres_fdw and WAL receiver in streaming replication.

I'm OK with either the current naming or b).  Frankly, I felt a bit strange when I first saw the keepalive parameters, wondering why the same names were not chosen.


Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa