On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > I wonder if we ought to backport this further: e.g. walsender > > continously uses nonblocking sockets via pq_getbyte_if_available(). On > > the other hand I can't immediately see a problem with that, besides > > differing messages on windows/the rest of the world. > > I'm slightly worried about breaking 3rd-party code that might be using > recv() and somehow expecting the current behavior. However, it's equally > arguable that such code would have Windows-specific problems that would be > fixed by the patch. Now that we've seen a successful round of buildfarm > results, I'd be okay with back-patching 90e61df8 personally. > > Any other opinions out there? >
Maybe holdoff until the release with the new code has been out for a while, but make sure we get it into the next set of minors? That'll give us at least some real world deployment to notice any issues with it? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
