Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2015-11-04 22:14 GMT+01:00 Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com>: > > > On 11/04/2015 01:11 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > >> I am sorry, but I have a different experience from GoodData. The few > >> hours autovacuum is usual. So probably, there should be exception for > >> autovacuum, dump, .. > > > > But autovacuum and dump are not idle in transaction or am I missing > > something? > > last Merlin's proposal was about transaction_timeout not > transaction_idle_timeout
I agree with Pavel. Having a transaction timeout just does not make any sense. I can see absolutely no use for it. An idle-in-transaction timeout, on the other hand, is very useful. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
