Re: idle connection timeout ...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: idle connection timeout ...
Date: 2002-10-25 03:27:05
Message-ID: 19558.1035516425@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> just went through the new config files for v7.3, to make sure, but
> it doens't look like we have such ... has anyone looked at adding a 'idle
> timeout' for a postgres process? Or am I missing something in the docs?

Are you looking for the backend to arbitrarily disconnect from a client
that hasn't done anything in X amount of time? Seems to me that has
been proposed and rejected, more than once.

We already have logic that checks for loss of connectivity (see TCP
keepalive option). If the client is *still there*, but has just not
chosen to issue any commands lately, I have a very hard time buying
any argument that it is the backend's province to abort the connection.
That's a recipe for degrading reliability, not improving it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-25 03:47:20 Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Previous Message Philip Warner 2002-10-25 03:13:02 Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?