Re: idle in transaction, why

From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: idle in transaction, why
Date: 2017-11-07 23:16:47
Message-ID: 633EBCD3-839C-4A8C-A7DA-46D662D2C552@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>
> 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
>
I see I didn’t clarify that the timeout was set in the pgbouncer configuration. (I had shown upstream that it was NOT set for the postgres server.) In pgbouncer, the unit is seconds.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-11-08 00:32:19 Re: Fwd: standby stop replicating, then picked back up
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2017-11-07 20:17:34 Re: Fwd: standby stop replicating, then picked back up