On 08/27/2014 08:05 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
[...]
Yeah, something like that. I don't think it would be necessary to set
statement_timeout, you can inject that in your script or postgresql.conf if
you want. I don't think aborting a transaction that's already started is
necessary either. You could count it as LATE, but let it finish first.
I've implemented something along these simplified lines. The latency is
not limited as such, but slow (over the limit) queries are counted and
reported.
Ok, thanks.
This now begs the question:
In --rate mode, shouldn't the reported transaction latency also be
calculated from the *scheduled* start time, not the time the transaction
actually started? Otherwise we're using two different definitions of
"latency", one for the purpose of the limit, and another for reporting.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
