On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Martin Pihlak<martin.pih...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-07/msg00191.php >> >> In line with Robert's suggestion, I submit non-blocking pqcomm patch >> as a self-contained one. >> > > Here's my initial review of the non-blocking pqcomm patch. The patch applies > cleanly and passes regression. Generally looks nice and clean. Couple of > remarks > from the department of nitpicking: > > * In secure_poll() the handling of timeouts is different depending whether > poll(), select() or SSL_pending() is used. The latter doesn't use the > timeout value at all, and for select() it is impossible to specify indefinite > timeout. > * occasional "blank" lines consisting of a single tab character -- maybe > a left-over from editor auto-indent. Not sure of how much a problem this > is, given that the blanks will be removed by pg_indent. > * Comment on pq_wait() seems to have a typo: "-1 if an error directly." > > I have done limited testing on Linux i686 (HAVE_POLL only) -- the non-blocking > functions behave as expected.
Fujii Masao, Are you planning to update this patch based on Martin's review? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
