Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vik Fearing
Subject Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout
Date
Msg-id 53A9ACD2.1010904@dalibo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 06/24/2014 06:43 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>> A long idle in transaction state pretty much always indicates a
>>>> >>> problematic interaction with postgres.
>>> >>
>>> >> True.  Which makes me wonder whether we shouldn't default this to
>>> >> something non-zero -- even if it is 5 or 10 days.
>
> I'd go for even shorter: 48 hours.  I'd suggest 24 hours, but that would
> trip up some users who just need really long pg_dumps.

Why would pg_dump be idle for 24 hours?
-- 
Vik



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: idle_in_transaction_timeout