| From: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: statement_timeout vs DECLARE CURSOR |
| Date: | 2021-09-27 18:10:19 |
| Message-ID: | B07C838E-5E08-40DC-89BD-BE6EB9EF8D80@thebuild.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> On Sep 27, 2021, at 10:42, Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> wrote:
> We've encountered some unexpected behavior with statement_timeout not cancelling a query in DECLARE CURSOR, but only if the DECLARE CURSOR is outside of a transaction:
A bit more poking revealed the reason: The ON HOLD cursor's query is executed at commit time (which is, logically, not interruptible), but that's all wrapped in the single statement outside of a transaction.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-09-27 19:40:39 | Re: statement_timeout vs DECLARE CURSOR |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2021-09-27 17:42:09 | statement_timeout vs DECLARE CURSOR |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-09-27 18:15:05 | Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers) |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira | 2021-09-27 18:09:49 | Re: two_phase commit parameter used in subscription for a publication which is on < 15. |