From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #16678: The ecpg connect/test5 test sometimes fails on
 Windows
In-reply-to: <f558fb39-ce9e-a516-d7c3-fc94fb581711@gmail.com>
References: <16678-253e48d34dc0c376@postgresql.org>
 <434311.1603135136@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <f558fb39-ce9e-a516-d7c3-fc94fb581711@gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sat, 24 Oct 2020 13:00:00 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <383221.1603561145.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 13:39:05 -0400
Message-ID: <383222.1603561145@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> writes:
> So I've also tested on Windows the following version:
>         secure_close(MyProcPort);
>         shutdown(MyProcPort->sock, SD_SEND);
>         for(;;) {
>             char buffer[1000];
>             int res = recv(MyProcPort->sock, buffer, 1000, 0);
>             if (res <= 0)
>                 break;
>         }
>         closesocket(MyProcPort->sock);
> And it works too.

I'm afraid this cure is probably worse than the disease, because
now the backend's exiting is held hostage by whether the client
closes its socket (and the resulting FIN reaches us, which it
might not if there's a network problem).

It might be safe to do the shutdown() only, since Microsoft
specifies that that doesn't block, but I have no idea if that
would improve matters.

			regards, tom lane