Re: snapshot too old, configured by time - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqQBiyN=L3WAzA15TaAhD3jrO2tbugcM3MUxrPehXid5hA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: snapshot too old, configured by time  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: snapshot too old, configured by time  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Or in short: this is a whole lot further than I'm prepared to go to
> satisfy one customer with a badly-designed application.  And from what
> I can tell from the Feb 2015 discussion, that's what this has been
> written for.

This holds true. I imagine that a lot of people at least on this list
have already spent some time in tracking down long-running
transactions in someone's application and actually tuned the
application so as the bloat gets reduced and things perform better for
other transactions taking a shorter time. Without the need of this
feature.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW