Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections)
| От | Jim Wilson |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 200502081231.j18CVDZ0007152@linus.kelco1.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections) (Thomas F.O'Connell <tfo@sitening.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections)
Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
> > Your application should handle failures in the middle of a transaction, > connection failures included, in a graceful but correct way. It does very well, until the next bug is discovered. > > I see your point (being able to safely shut a connection down on the > server side), but it\'s at the _bottom_ of any list. > > .TM. > -- > / / / > / / / Marco Colombo That\'s unfortunate. I\'ve tried to explain my position off list to Marco, but it really isn\'t worth debating. FWIW I think this thread was started by someone with application issues. The fact is, such things happen. Unfortunately Marco choses speaks for "any list" and I\'ll just repeat that I find this instability issue the most significant drawback for Postgres installations. This doesn\'t mean that there aren\'t other areas of priority for other users. And no, I do not want to debate the meaning of the word "instability". :-) Best regards, Jim Wilson
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: