From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, david(at)fetter(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Statement timeout behavior in extended queries |
Date: | 2017-04-05 04:39:51 |
Message-ID: | 18693.1491367191@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-04-05 10:05:19 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> What's your point of the question? What kind of problem do you expect
>> if the timeout starts only once at the first parse meesage out of
>> bunch of parse messages?
> It's perfectly valid to send a lot of Parse messages without
> interspersed Sync or Bind/Execute message. There'll be one timeout
> covering all of those Parse messages, which can thus lead to a timeout,
> even though nothing actually takes long individually.
It might well be reasonable to redefine statement_timeout as limiting the
total time from the first client input to the response to Sync ... but
if that's what we're doing, let's make sure we do it consistently.
I haven't read the patch, but the comments in this thread make me fear
that it's introducing some ad-hoc, inconsistent behavior.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-04-05 04:42:12 | Re: Compiler warning in costsize.c |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2017-04-05 04:33:28 | Re: BRIN cost estimate |