From: Michael Paquier [mailto:mich...@paquier.xyz] > I have just committed the GUC and libpq portion for TCP_USER_TIMEOUT after > a last lookup, and I have cleaned up a couple of places.
Thank you for further cleanup and committing. > For the socket_timeout stuff, its way of solving the problem it thinks is > solves does not seem right to me, and this thread has not reached a consensus > anyway, so I have discarded the issue. > > I am marking the CF entry as committed. In the future, it would be better > to not propose multiple concepts on the same thread, and if the > socket_timeout business is resubmitted, I would suggest a completely new > CF entry, and a new thread. Understood. Looking back the review process, it seems that tcp_user_timeout and socket_timeout should have been handled in separate threads. Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
