Re: Performance bug in prepared statement binding in 9.2?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: Performance bug in prepared statement binding in 9.2?
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1z0fEKRb4=weoeCFLkEuJqL-hmvtniVPWn+pRT8bUKMcA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Performance bug in prepared statement binding in 9.2?  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
Дерево обсуждения
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2013-09-11 15:06:23 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> One thing that this made me wonder is why we don't have transaction_timeout,
> or maybe transaction_idle_timeout.

Because it's harder than it sounds, at least if you want to support
idle-in-transactions. Note that we do not support pg_cancel_backend()
for those yet...

So we are left with pg_terminate_backend in a cron job.  That mostly seems to work, because usually apps that abandon connections in the idle-in-transaction state will never check back on them anyway, but cancel would be nicer.
 

Also, I think it might lead to papering over actual issues with
applications leaving transactions open. I don't really see a valid
reason for an application needing cancelling of long idle transactions.

Some of us make a living, at least partially, by papering over issues with 3rd party applications that we have no control over!

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: didier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging transaction (20-30 times)?
Следующее
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging transaction (20-30 times)?