Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell Smith wrote:
I agree with this, it reduces the long running transaction problem a
little where the user forgot to commit/rollback their session. I may be
worth having a transaction_timeout as well, and setting it to link a few
hours by default. That way you can't have really long running
transactions unless you specifically set that.
We would certainly need to be able to disable on the fly too just with
SET as well.
I should have read what you posted more thoroughly. I apologize. A
transaction timeout is surely a bad idea as Tom says below. Heck, not
just from what he says below, but what about the scenario that killing a
transaction could cause a massive rollback and thus increase the initial
problem that I posted about :)
An *idle* timeout seems less risky, as well as much easier to pick a
sane value for.
Yeah, it could as high as something like 60 minutes if we really wanted.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
