Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state

On Jan 1, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 07:08 -0800, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> w
>>> We could either endlessly repeat this
>>>
>>> ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with
>>> recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction block
>>
>> +1 for this option.
>>
>>> I'm also not sure why we would want to single out Hot Standby to
>>> generate the reason "because of conflict with recovery" when no
>>> other
>>> ERROR source would generate such a reason.
>>
>> Well, most times when the transaction is aborted, it's because you
>> did
>> something wrong. Or at least, the failure is associated with some
>> particular statement.
>>
>> If we have other events that can asynchronously roll back a
>> transaction, I would think they would deserve similar handling. Off
>> the top of my head, I'm not sure if there are any such cases.
>
> Serialization failures, deadlocks, timeouts, SIGINT, out of memory
> errors etc..

Hmm. I don't think I can get a serialization failure, deadlock, or out
of memory error while my session is idle. An idle timeout or SIGINT is
analagous, I think.

...Robert