Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again
Date: 2009-04-22 17:53:11
Message-ID: 20090422175310.GB10358@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

> Anyway, maybe question zero is whether anyone else thinks this is
> important enough to justify extra work in the area.

One thing that has already changed is that DROP DATABASE reports "N
users and M prepared transactions", so there is more of a hint.

Another thing we could do is make autovacuum log something about those,
similar to what it does to temp tables. And if one of them gets too
near Xid wraparound, kill it.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-04-22 17:58:48 Re: trouble with to_char('L')
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-04-22 17:48:31 Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again