At 2014-06-22 19:45:08 -0700, david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Sunday, June 22, 2014, Kevin Grittner-5 [via PostgreSQL] < > ml-node+s1045698n580830...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > > > If we stick with the rule that what is to the left of _timeout is > > what is being cancelled, the a GUC to cancel a transaction which > > remains idle for too long could be called idle_transaction_timeout.
I (somewhat reluctantly) agree with Kevin that "idle_in_transaction_session_timeout" (for FATAL) and "idle_transaction_timeout" (for ERROR) would work. The only other alternative I see is to use "idle_transaction_timeout" now (even when we're killing the session) and later introduce another setting named "idle_transaction_timeout_keep_session" (default false) or something like that. (I'd prefer an extra boolean to something set to 'session' or 'transaction'.) > Idle_transaction_timeout has already been discarded since truly idle > transactions are not being affected, only those that are in > transaction. I have no idea what this means. -- Abhijit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
