Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again
Date
Msg-id 406fadd46e6bc8b121b655f3eaef0fa8@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again  (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


> The pgsql-admin list has just seen another instance where careless use
> of prepared transactions brought down a database, and the DBA (who had
> no idea what a prepared transaction even was) had no idea how to fix it.

Just as a followup (and I already posted this on the pgsql-admin thread),
the check_postgres script now has a specific check for this very case.
It simply checks the age of entries in pg_prepared_xacts and gives
a warning if the number is at or over the given threshhold (defaults
to 1 second). I'm still a heavy +1 on making the default Postgres
configuration value 0, but hopefully this will help.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200905051128
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkoAW0wACgkQvJuQZxSWSsgGRgCePjErqeAPEv4MLJzgEnh/tXtA
yLEAoPhBNvaWvcmTF9D8faZzI044zpBL
=ouXW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: conditional dropping of columns/constraints
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again