From: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, 邱宇航 <iamqyh(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin86(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Transaction timeout |
Date: | 2023-12-22 14:25:37 |
Message-ID: | ME3P282MB316662CE6ED67FB49C930BC9B694A@ME3P282MB3166.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 at 20:29, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 1:39 PM Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 22:06, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 18:27, Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
>> >>> On 19 Dec 2023, at 13:26, Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I don’t have Windows machine, so I hope CF bot will pick this.
>> >>
>> >> I used Github CI to produce version of tests that seems to be is stable on Windows.
>> >
>> > It still failed on Windows Server 2019 [1].
>> >
>> > diff -w -U3 C:/cirrus/src/test/isolation/expected/timeouts.out C:/cirrus/build/testrun/isolation/isolation/results/timeouts.out
>> > --- C:/cirrus/src/test/isolation/expected/timeouts.out 2023-12-19 10:34:30.354721100 +0000
>> > +++ C:/cirrus/build/testrun/isolation/isolation/results/timeouts.out 2023-12-19 10:38:25.877981600 +0000
>> > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@
>> > step stt3_check_stt2: SELECT count(*) FROM pg_stat_activity WHERE application_name = 'isolation/timeouts/stt2'
>> > count
>> > -----
>> > - 0
>> > + 1
>> > (1 row)
>> >
>> > step itt4_set: SET idle_in_transaction_session_timeout = '1ms'; SET statement_timeout = '10s'; SET lock_timeout = '10s'; SET transaction_timeout = '10s';
>> >
>> > [1] https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/4707530400595968/testrun/build/testrun/isolation/isolation/regression.diffs
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I try to split the test for transaction timeout, and all passed on my CI [1].
>>
>> OTOH, I find if I set transaction_timeout in a transaction, it will not take
>> effect immediately. For example:
>>
>> [local]:2049802 postgres=# BEGIN;
>> BEGIN
>> [local]:2049802 postgres=*# SET transaction_timeout TO '1s';
> when this execute, TransactionTimeout is still 0, this command will
> not set timeout
>> SET
>> [local]:2049802 postgres=*# SELECT relname FROM pg_class LIMIT 1; -- wait 10s
> when this command get execute, start_xact_command will enable the timer
Thanks for your exaplantion, got it.
>> relname
>> --------------
>> pg_statistic
>> (1 row)
>>
>> [local]:2049802 postgres=*# SELECT relname FROM pg_class LIMIT 1;
>> FATAL: terminating connection due to transaction timeout
>> server closed the connection unexpectedly
>> This probably means the server terminated abnormally
>> before or while processing the request.
>> The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Succeeded.
>>
>> It looks odd. Does this is expected? I'm not read all the threads,
>> am I missing something?
>
> I think this is by design, if you debug statement_timeout, it's the same
> behaviour, the timeout will be set for each command after the second
> command was called, you just aren't aware of this.
>
I try to set idle_in_transaction_session_timeout after begin transaction,
it changes immediately, so I think transaction_timeout should also be take
immediately.
> I doubt people will set this in a transaction.
Maybe not,
--
Regrads,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2023-12-22 14:29:28 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
Previous Message | John Naylor | 2023-12-22 14:09:33 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |