Re: BUG #18075: configuration variable idle_session_timeout not working as expected

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "maliansari(dot)coder(at)gmail(dot)com" <maliansari(dot)coder(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #18075: configuration variable idle_session_timeout not working as expected
Date: 2023-08-29 21:46:49
Message-ID: 49264.1693345609@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tuesday, August 29, 2023, PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> wrote:
>> I have set the idle_session_timeout variable as 60000 making it 60 seconds
>> As we can see, it shows that the time is way more than 1 minute now it is
>> 28 minutes and they are still idle and still open in postgres and not
>> disconnected as expected.

> Not sure how you got 28 minutes from 45748…which is large enough that it is
> probable those sessions started before you changed the timeout and so are
> not affected by it.

I believe idle_session_timeout is consulted when the session goes
idle, and we either set a timeout interrupt or not. The prevailing
value might change after that, but it won't affect existing sessions
until they next go idle. I do not regard that as a bug.

Also, the OP didn't say *how* he set idle_session_timeout. That
pg_settings extract only proves that 60000 is the prevailing value in
the session where that was done. It's possible that the value was
only set locally, or in some other way that didn't affect those other
sessions at all.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2023-08-30 06:32:43 BUG #18077: PostgreSQL server subprocess crashed by a SELECT statement with WITH clause
Previous Message Robert Sanford 2023-08-29 21:37:13 Re: BUG #18076: Consistently receiving Signal 7 and Signal 11 errors