| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Wheeler <hippysoyboy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Siddharth Jain <siddhsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: what happens if a failed transaction is not rolled back? |
| Date: | 2023-04-25 02:06:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAHyXU0whm0B03a60KtLjoty=JHVoO0GSDip7b0q3a2F6nrcEdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 8:41 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Hm. I also noticed when looking at this that aborted transactions with
> > savepoints are not subjected to the idle_in_transaction timeout which is
> a
> > bit surprising.
>
> Hmm ... I think it's intentional that idle_in_transaction no longer
> applies once the transaction has failed. But if there's a live
> savepoint, then we should enforce it since resources may still be
> held. Seems like a bug, if your observation is accurate.
>
>
hm, double checking, it's not.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2023-04-25 02:09:43 | wiki.postgres Tighten trigger permission checks already resolved |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-04-25 01:41:25 | Re: what happens if a failed transaction is not rolled back? |