Re: pg_terminate_backend
От | Csaba Nagy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_terminate_backend |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1154621402.21451.74.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_terminate_backend (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_terminate_backend
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
You didn't answer the original question: is killing SIGTERM a backend known/suspected to be dangerous ? And if yes, what's the risk (pointers to discussions would be nice too). > statement_timeout is your friend. I know, but unfortunately I can't use it. I did try to use statement_timeout and it worked out quite bad (due to our usage scenario). Some of the web requests which time out on the web should still go through... and we have activities which should not observe statement timeout at all, i.e. they must finish however long that takes. I know it would be possible to use a different user with it's own statement timeout for those requests, but that means we have to rewrite a lot of code which is not possible immediately, and our admins would resist to add even more configuration (additional users=additional connection pool+caches and all to be configured). We also can fix the queries so no timeout happens in the first place, but that will take us even more time. Cheers, Csaba.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: