Re: Replication server timeout patch

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Daniel Farina <drfarina@acm.org> wrote:
>> I split this out of the synchronous replication patch for independent
>> review. I'm dashing out the door, so I haven't put it on the CF yet or
>> anything, but I just wanted to get it out there...I'll be around in
>> Not Too Long to finish any other details.
>
> This looks like a useful and separately committable change.
>
> However, it looks to me like this renders wal_sender_delay aka
> WalSndDelay completely unused.  If we don't need that GUC any more, we
> should rip it out completely.

Indeed; I have cleaned this up.

> The comment in WalSndHandshake should have a tab at the beginning of
> every line.  Right now the first line has a tab and the rest have
> spaces.
>
Also correct. Done.

> The first hunk in WalSndLoop is a meaningless whitespace change.

I was trying to get it under 80 columns wide, but yes, it is unnecessary.

I think this closes out the small fry.

I have rebased my splitorific branch to reflect these changes:

https://github.com/fdr/postgres/commits/splitorific

Context diff equivalent attached.

-- 
fdr