Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Feature thought: idle in transaction timeout

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feature thought: idle in transaction timeout
Date: 2007-04-03 01:21:16
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Added to TODO:

	* Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time


Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Russell Smith wrote:
> >> I agree with this, it reduces the long running transaction problem a 
> >> little where the user forgot to commit/rollback their session.  I may be 
> >> worth having a transaction_timeout as well, and setting it to link a few 
> >> hours by default.  That way you can't have really long running 
> >> transactions unless you specifically set that.
> > We would certainly need to be able to disable on the fly too just with 
> > SET as well.
> AFAICS, a *transaction* timeout per se has no use whatever except as a
> foot-gun.  How will you feel when you start a 12-hour restore, go home
> for the evening, and come back in the morning to find it aborted because
> you forgot to disable your 4-hour timeout?
> Furthermore, if you have to set transaction_timeout to multiple hours
> in the (vain) hope of not killing something important, what use is it
> really?  If you want to keep VACUUM able to work in a busy database,
> you need it to be a lot less than that.
> An *idle* timeout seems less risky, as well as much easier to pick a
> sane value for.
> 			regards, tom lane
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-04-03 01:23:17
Subject: Re: Logging checkpoints and other slowdown causes
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-04-03 01:16:19
Subject: Re: CheckpointStartLock starvation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group