Re: [GENERAL] idle in transaction, why - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Thomas Kellerer
Subject Re: [GENERAL] idle in transaction, why
Date
Msg-id otrmk6$63m$1@blaine.gmane.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] idle in transaction, why  (Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] idle in transaction, why  (Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
Re: [GENERAL] idle in transaction, why  (Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Rob Sargent schrieb am 06.11.2017 um 23:09:
> Gosh I wish I could learn to proof-read my posts.
> My support crew graciously set
> 
> idle_transaction_timeout = 1
> 
> Now to ponder if I need zero or some large number.

The unit of that setting is milliseconds (if no unit is specified). 
zero disables that feature.

One millisecond seems like an awfully short period to allow a transaction to be idle. 

I would figure values in "minutes" to be more realistic depending on the workload and characteristics of the
application.
 

A transaction that has several seconds of "think time" between individual statements doesn't seem that unrealistic. 


Thomas




-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: John R Pierce
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Incremental refresh - Materialized view
Next
From: hmidi slim
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Combine multiple text search configuration