| From: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | 邱宇航 <iamqyh(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin86(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transaction timeout |
| Date: | 2023-12-08 07:59:34 |
| Message-ID: | SY8PR01MB9288F5CF03D38662BE59C628B68AA@SY8PR01MB9288.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 07 Dec 2023 at 20:40, Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
>> On 7 Dec 2023, at 06:25, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> If idle_in_transaction_timeout is bigger than transaction_timeout,
>> the idle-in-transaction timeout don't needed, right?
> Yes, I think so.
>
Should we disable the idle_in_transaction_timeout in this case? Of cursor, I'm
not strongly insist on this.
I think you forget disable transaction_timeout in AutoVacWorkerMain().
If not, can you elaborate on why you don't disable it?
--
Regrads,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2023-12-08 08:05:53 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2023-12-08 07:51:11 | Re: Rename ShmemVariableCache and initialize it in more standard way |