MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAOYmi+nDZxJHaWj9_jRSyf8uMToCADAmOfJEggsKW-kY7aUwHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+mRhhzGUvrcdickepAnsdaGbqhNcboNe4-YvgtkSzGNbQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOYmi+mRhhzGUvrcdickepAnsdaGbqhNcboNe4-YvgtkSzGNbQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 02:53:18 +1200
Message-ID: 
 <CA+hUKGLyS-GK_rkENaVbFVTa4VJ+reJxWtt+q4gmgNUXhptfYA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OAuth: fix performance bug with stuck multiplexer events
To: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BhUKGLyS-GK_rkENaVbFVTa4VJ%2BreJxWtt%2Bq4gmgNUXhptfYA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 8:52=E2=80=AFAM Jacob Champion
<jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 4:33=E2=80=AFPM Jacob Champion
> <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > My plan, if this code seems reasonable, is to backport 0001-0003, but
> > keep the larger 0004 on HEAD only until it has proven to be stable.
> > It's a big new suite and I want to make sure it's not flapping on some
> > buildfarm animal. Eventually I'll backport that too.
>
> Any thoughts on the approach? Too big/too scary/too BSD-specific?
>
> A small bit of self-review: a comment I wrote in the tests suggested
> that the choice of readable/writable events was up to the multiplexer
> implementation, but it *must* choose readable, due to the hardcoded
> use of PGRES_POLLING_READING throughout the current code. Updated in
> v2.

[FYI, I'm looking into this and planning to post a review in 1-2 days...]