Re: Replication server timeout patch
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-03-07T11:47:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- replication_timeout_v5.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v5
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Why does internal_flush_if_writable compute bufptr differently from >>> internal_flush? And shouldn't it be static? >>> >>> It seems to me that this ought to be refactored so that you don't >>> duplicate so much code. Maybe static int internal_flush(bool >>> nonblocking). >>> >>> I don't think that the while (bufptr < bufend) loop needs to contain >>> the code to set and clear the nonblocking state. You could do the >>> whole loop with nonblocking mode turned on and then reenable it just >>> once at the end. Besides possibly being clearer, that would be more >>> efficient and leave less room for unexpected failures. >> >> All these comments seem to make sense. Will fix. Thanks! > > Done. I attached the updated patch. I rebased the patch against current git master. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center