On 11/06/2017 01:50 PM, Rob Sargent wrote:
>
>
> On 11/06/2017 01:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> writes:
>>> idle_in_transaction_session_timeout | 0 | default |
>>> | | A value of 0 turns off the timeout. | user
>> Meh. I think we're barking up the wrong tree anyway: so far as I can
>> find, there is no error message reading 'idle transaction timeout'
>> in the existing PG sources (and I sure hope no committer would have
>> thought that such an ambiguous message text was satisfactory).
>> So I think your error is coming from client-side or third-party code.
>> What other moving parts have you got in there?
>>
>> regards, tom lane
> The most likely culprit is JOOQ, which I chose as a learning
> experience (normally I use ORM tools). But that said, I just ran the
> same data into my test env, (postgres 10.0 (real) on centos 6.9,
> ubuntu client) and all went swimmingly. It's a sizable payload
> (several batches of over 100K items, deserialized from json) and takes
> 5 minutes to save.
>
> I was hoping to blame the virt or the beta. Not a good time to start
> doubt JOOQ
My bet is that those 'org.postgres' messages came from the jdbc driver.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
