Tom Lane wrote: > While cleaning out old mail about two-phase commit, I noticed this > thought from Oliver: > > Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> Probably the next question is, do we want a database-side timeout on > >>> how long prepared txns can stay alive before being summarily rolled back? > >> > >> That sounds very dangerous to me. You could end up breaking global > >> atomicity if some other resource in the global transaction committed. > > > Right. You wouldn't enable it lightly.. > > > If pg_prepared_xacts had a time-of-preparation column, it would be > > possible to put the timeout policy in an external client. Perhaps that's > > a better solution? > > This seems like a good idea to me in any case --- barring objections, > I will add this to the data structures and view.
I am a little confused by the use of the term "prepared" in terms of 2-phase commit vs. prepared queries. Is there a way to make the wording clearer? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
