Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout
Дата
Msg-id
75706.1403710847@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
idle_in_transaction_timeout Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>
Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>
Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Fujii Masao  writes:
> Why is IIT timeout turned on only when send_ready_for_query is true?
> I was thinking it should be turned on every time a message is received.
> Imagine the case where the session is in idle-in-transaction state and
> a client gets stuck after sending Parse message and before sending Bind
> message. This case would also cause long transaction problem and should
> be resolved by IIT timeout. But IIT timeout that this patch adds cannot
> handle this case because it's enabled only when send_ready_for_query is
> true. Thought?

I think you just moved the goalposts to the next county.

The point of this feature, AFAICS, is to detect clients that are failing
to issue another query or close their transaction as a result of bad
client logic.  It's not to protect against network glitches.

Moreover, there would be no way to implement a timeout like that without
adding a gettimeofday() call after every packet receipt, which is overhead
we do not need and cannot afford.  I don't think this feature should add
*any* gettimeofday's beyond the ones that are already there.
		regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_filedump for 9.4?
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RLS Design
FAQ