Alexander Lakhin <exclus...@gmail.com> writes: > 27.11.2021 14:39, Lars Kanis wrote: >> So I still think it's best to close the socket as proposed in the patch.
> Please see also the previous discussion of the topic: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/16678-253e48d34dc0c376%40postgresql.org Hm, yeah, that discussion seems to have slipped through the cracks. Not sure why it didn't end up in pushing something. After re-reading that thread and re-studying relevant Windows documentation [1][2], I think the main open question is whether we need to issue shutdown() or not, and if so, whether to use SD_BOTH or just SD_SEND. I'm inclined to prefer not calling shutdown(), because [1] is self-contradictory as to whether it can block, and [2] is pretty explicit that it's not necessary. regards, tom lane [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winsock/nf-winsock-shutdown [2] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winsock/graceful-shutdown-linger-options-and-socket-closure-2
