Re: total number of concurrent connections
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: total number of concurrent connections |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6370.1248746544@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: total number of concurrent connections (Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: total number of concurrent connections
|
Список | pgsql-novice |
Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> What are you doing to "terminate" these remote connections? What it >> sounds like is the connected server process isn't being told about the >> termination, and so it sits there waiting for input that will never >> come. > Normally, just quitting from psql, but as part of today's experiment I > rebooted the system that the table claimed was still connected. The > server is running Linux with a reasonably recent 2.6.x kernel. Hm, but what's the client-side OS? A reasonable OS should send a connection close notification (TCP RST) when the psql process dies, even if you managed to kill it in a way that prevented psql from closing the connection for itself. However, if that didn't happen for some reason, reboot would not make things better. It would just guarantee that the OS no longer had any memory of the connection either. It still sounds like your problems are fundamentally network-level problems and not Postgres problems... but it's hard to tell from here whether it's client-side software or network infrastructure doing it to you. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: