<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 1:22 PM Tatsuo Ishii <<a href="mailto:ishii@sraoss.co.jp">ishii@sraoss.co.jp</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi Usama,<br>
<br>
But actually your commit deeply modifies not only watchdog, but other<br>
modules. I worry about the side effects those modificarions other<br>
than watchdog modules.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The modifications other than in the watchdog module are mostly cosmetic in nature and done to segregate the socket stream from pool stream.</div><div>Having said that, I agree with your point that there could be some unforeseen side effects and its better to keep it for the next version.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks</div><div>Best Regards</div><div>Muhammad Usama</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
> Hi Ishii-San,<br>
> <br>
> Although we are very late in the release cycle. But I was wondering since<br>
> wd_cli is a separate utility so we can also push it to the V4_1_STABLE<br>
> branch<br>
> so that we can release it along with 4.1 GA, otherwise, it will take quite<br>
> a long before someone is able to use it.<br>
> <br>
> What are your thoughts?<br>
> <br>
> Best Regards<br>
> Muhammad Usama<br>
> <br>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 1:08 PM Muhammad Usama <<a href="mailto:m.usama@gmail.com" target="_blank">m.usama@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM Tatsuo Ishii <<a href="mailto:ishii@sraoss.co.jp" target="_blank">ishii@sraoss.co.jp</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> > Hi Tatsuo<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > I have not changed/removed the 'lifecheck started" message and I am<br>
>>> getting<br>
>>> > clean<br>
>>> > regression including this test case.<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > testing 028.watchdog_enable_consensus_with_half_votes...ok.<br>
>>> > out of 1 ok:1 failed:0 timeout:0<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > Can you send me the pgpool.log for a failed test case? It could be some<br>
>>> > other issue that was<br>
>>> > preventing the pgpool-II to start up in time.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Strange. This time the test has passed. Will notify you if I get the<br>
>>> failure again (along with pgpool.log).<br>
>>><br>
>>> Sure, Thanks<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> BTW, I get compiler warning after your commit:<br>
>>><br>
>>> psprintf.c:139:45: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘strerror’;<br>
>>> did you mean ‘perror’? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]<br>
>>> fprintf(stderr, "vsnprintf failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));<br>
>>> ^~~~~~~~<br>
>>> perror<br>
>>> psprintf.c:139:39: warning: format ‘%s’ expects argument of type ‘char<br>
>>> *’, but argument 3 has type ‘int’ [-Wformat=]<br>
>>> fprintf(stderr, "vsnprintf failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));<br>
>>> ~^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>
>>> %d<br>
>>><br>
>>> Sorry about that. I will take care of this one.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> Best regards,<br>
>>> --<br>
>>> Tatsuo Ishii<br>
>>> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan<br>
>>> English: <a href="http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php</a><br>
>>> Japanese:<a href="http://www.sraoss.co.jp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sraoss.co.jp</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
</blockquote></div></div>