From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Mark Williamson <thetazzbot(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: statement_timeout is not cancelling query |
Date: | 2009-12-15 18:33:43 |
Message-ID: | 22268.1260902023@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>> If we're to do anything about this, it is spilling the trigger queue so
>>> it doesn't eat an unbounded amount of memory.
>>
>> Of course, the reason nothing much has been done about that is that
>> by the time your trigger queue is long enough to cause such an issue,
>> you're screwed anyway --- actually executing all those triggers would
>> take longer than you'll want to wait.
> What is the best way to go about doing that, anyway?
Well, we added conditional triggers which provides a partial fix. The
only other idea I've heard that sounds like it'd really help is having
some sort of lossy storage for foreign-key triggers, where we'd fall
back to per-block or whole-table rechecking of the constraint instead of
trying to track the exact rows that were modified. Not sure how you
apply that to non-FK triggers though.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2009-12-15 19:19:32 | Re: BUG #5242: ODBC driver v8.4.1 crashed |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-15 18:29:25 | Re: BUG #5242: ODBC driver v8.4.1 crashed |