Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
Date
Msg-id CA+fd4k4ektKrpyOL6nvZ6WPUg+05SiDNWZ9ZLAFt4W9K=4cpqg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2  ("tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" <tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 13:23, tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com
<tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
> > I don't think the inability to cancel all session at once cannot be a
> > reason not to not to allow operators to cancel a stuck session.
>
> Yeah, I didn't mean to discount the ability to cancel queries.  I just want to confirm how the user can use the
cancellationin practice.  I didn't see how the user can use the cancellation in the FDW framework, so I asked about it.
We have to think about the user's context if we regard canceling commits as important. 
>

I think it doesn't matter whether in FDW framework or not. The user
normally doesn't care which backend processes connecting to foreign
servers. They will attempt to cancel the query like always if they
realized that a backend gets stuck. There are surely plenty of users
who use query cancellation.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada            http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix checksum verification in base backups for zero page headers
Next
From: Andy Fan
Date:
Subject: Re: Wired if-statement in gen_partprune_steps_internal