Neil Conway wrote:
> adnandursun@asrinbilisim.com.tr wrote:
>
>> statement_timeout is not a solution if many processes are
>> waiting the resource.
>
>
> Why not?
>
> I think the only problem with using statement_timeout for this purpose
> is that the client connection might die during a long-running
> transaction at a point when no statement is currently executing. Tom's
> suggested transaction_timeout would be a reasonable way to fix this.
> Adnan, if you think this is such a significant problem (I can't say that
> I agree), I'd encourage you to submit a patch.
I raised this a while back on -hackers:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-02/msg00397.php
but did not get much feedback.
Does anyone have comments on that email?
It's a problem that is unlikely to happen in normal operation, but you
do need to deal with it to cover the network failure cases if you have
an otherwise failure-tolerant cluster..
-O
