Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state |
Дата | |
Msg-id | E41F51B4-913A-4E5B-B911-D130263B134D@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 1, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 07:08 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> w >>> We could either endlessly repeat this >>> >>> ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with >>> recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction block >> >> +1 for this option. >> >>> I'm also not sure why we would want to single out Hot Standby to >>> generate the reason "because of conflict with recovery" when no >>> other >>> ERROR source would generate such a reason. >> >> Well, most times when the transaction is aborted, it's because you >> did >> something wrong. Or at least, the failure is associated with some >> particular statement. >> >> If we have other events that can asynchronously roll back a >> transaction, I would think they would deserve similar handling. Off >> the top of my head, I'm not sure if there are any such cases. > > Serialization failures, deadlocks, timeouts, SIGINT, out of memory > errors etc.. Hmm. I don't think I can get a serialization failure, deadlock, or out of memory error while my session is idle. An idle timeout or SIGINT is analagous, I think. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: