Re: pg_sleep_enhancements.patch
| От | Pavel Stehule |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pg_sleep_enhancements.patch |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFj8pRBEryyMfkXg_e7Eg97yzCXSjPHxyhpnASwmY5wisixL1Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: pg_sleep_enhancements.patch (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2014-01-29 Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>
On 01/29/2014 08:21 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:It is no more dangerous than plain pg_sleep(). The use case is
> second question - is not this functionality too dangerous? If somebody
> use it as scheduler, then
>
> a) can holds connect, session data, locks too long time
> b) it can stop on query timeout probably much more early then user expect
>
> What is expected use case?
convenience and clarity of code.
I don't think people will be using it as a scheduler any more than they
do with pg_sleep() because it can't cross transaction boundaries.
I am sure so experienced user didn't use it. But beginners can be messed due similarity with schedulers.
I invite a) documented these risks b) opinion of other hackers
Probably when it is used as single statement in transaction, then it can breaks only vacuum
Pavel
--
Vik
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: