Re: Statement timeout behavior in extended queries

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: 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 01:08:41
Message-ID: 20170405010841.dfggucoyqavqeto6@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017-04-05 10:05:19 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Hm. I started to edit it, but I'm halfway coming back to my previous
> > view that this isn't necessarily ready.
> >
> > If a client were to to prepare a large number of prepared statements
> > (i.e. a lot of parse messages), this'll only start the timeout once, at
> > the first statement sent. It's not an issue for libpq which sends a
> > sync message after each PQprepare, nor does it look to be an issue for
> > pgjdbc based on a quick look.
> >
> > Does anybody think there might be a driver out there that sends a bunch
> > of 'parse' messages, without syncs?
>
> 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.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2017-04-05 01:17:44 Re: ANALYZE command progress checker
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-04-05 01:05:25 Outdated comments around HandleFunctionRequest