On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> There are two things that I think are pretty clear. If the receiver >> has wal_receiver_status_interval=0, then we should ignore >> replication_timeout for that connection. > > The patch still doesn't check that wal_receiver_status_interval > is set up properly. I'll implement that later.
Done. I attached the updated patch. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
replication_timeout_v3.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
