On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Here's an updated version; this mainly simplifies code, per comments > from Andres (things were a bit too baroque in places due to the way the > code had evolved, and I hadn't gone over it to simplify it). > > The only behavior change is that the renegotiation is requested 1kB > before the limit is hit: the raise to 1% of the configured limit was > removed.
What basis do we have for thinking that 1kB is definitely enough to avoid spurious disconnects? (I have a bad feeling that you're going to say something along the lines of "well, we tried it a bunch of times, and...".) -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
