desmodemone wrote: > As I tested and saw until now, the keep alive functions as follow [if I understand correctly and it's > not a bug] : > > When a connection it's in idle state or in idle in transaction, if the connection with client it's > broken for a number of keep alive, the backend will be terminated. > > > By the way if this could be ok in an OLTP enviroment, because the average time of a query is << the > time of keep alive, in a DWH enviroment could be a problem. > > Imagine your application server, where there is an ETL, will go down for 1 minute and your > transactions are still running on the DWH database, that transactions could run for hours before the > > keep alive will terminate them, because they are in transaction state and not idle or idle in > transaction. TCP keepalive will also terminate a session that is currently stuck in a long running SQL query if the client end dies. I think that your problem is that you mix up different meanings of "idle". In PostgreSQL, a connection is idle (or idle in transaction) if processing of the last command is finished and the server is waiting for the next command from the client. In TCP, a connection is idle if there is no network traffic. Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
