Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
От | Masahiko Sawada |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+fd4k4ektKrpyOL6nvZ6WPUg+05SiDNWZ9ZLAFt4W9K=4cpqg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 ("tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 13:23, tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> > > I don't think the inability to cancel all session at once cannot be a > > reason not to not to allow operators to cancel a stuck session. > > Yeah, I didn't mean to discount the ability to cancel queries. I just want to confirm how the user can use the cancellationin practice. I didn't see how the user can use the cancellation in the FDW framework, so I asked about it. We have to think about the user's context if we regard canceling commits as important. > I think it doesn't matter whether in FDW framework or not. The user normally doesn't care which backend processes connecting to foreign servers. They will attempt to cancel the query like always if they realized that a backend gets stuck. There are surely plenty of users who use query cancellation. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: