Re: Terminate the idle sessions

From: Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Li Japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Terminate the idle sessions
Date: 2020-06-10 14:27:11
Message-ID: CAMjNa7fnbs9sXA4egE_o=r-MwP6R0VYHS55pvq6ujVndsXrqBw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> > Why not implement it in the core of Postgres? Are there any
disadvantages of
> implementing it in the core of Postgres?
I was surprised this wasn't a feature when I looked into it a couple years
ago. I'd use it if it were built in, but I am not installing something
extra just for this.

> I’m curious as to the use case because I cannot imagine using this.

My use case is, I have a primary application that connects to the DB, most
users work through that (setting is useless for this scenario, app manages
it's connections well enough). I also have a number of internal users who
deal with data ingestion and connect to the DB directly to work, and those
users sometimes leave query windows open for days accidentally. Generally
not an issue, but would be nice to be able to time those connections out.

Just my $0.02, but I am +1.
-Adam

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2020-06-10 14:45:37 Re: elog(DEBUG2 in SpinLocked section.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-06-10 14:13:40 Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm