On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2015-11-03 3:42 GMT+01:00 Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com>: > >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> It is 100% true. But the users can do strange things. If we solve idle >>> transactions and not idle session, then they are able to increase >>> max_connections to thousands with happy smile in face. >>> >>> I have not strong idea about how to solve it well - maybe introduce >>> transaction_idle_timeout and session_idle_timeout? >>> >>> >> What exactly do we want to define session_idle_timeout? Some >> possibilities: >> a. Reset the session related variables like transaction, prepared >> statements, etc. and retain it for connection pool kind of stuff >> b. Exit from the session >> > > b is safe state - and currently it is only one state, that we can forward > to client side (with keep_alive packets) - so I prefer b > > Okay, I think one more point to consider is that it would be preferable to have such an option for backend sessions and not for other processes like WalSender. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
