On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 10:32:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Ilja Golshtein" <ilejn@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > To be honest, I don't quite understand why PG does 'send' again and again, while > > EPIPE seems to be unrecoverable. > > Isn't it better to terminate server process? > > No. See previous discussions in the archives. > > (One point is that a long-running query isn't necessarily generating any > output, anyway, so this wouldn't be a magic cure for anything.) Ok, so I did look through the archives [1] and came up with your following example: > As an example: whether an UPDATE command completes might depend on > whether any invoked triggers try to issue NOTICEs. So you are saying if I start a really long update on a remote server and my computer crashes, the UPDATE should complete even though it cannot communicate that result. (-EPIPE is non recoverable_ Not quite what I expected, but that means that you should *always* explicitly use BEGIN and COMMIT if you want to know whether or not a query has actually successfully completed. Otherwise it can complete without you being aware of it. Actually, this explains a crash we had recently. Somoeone had typed in a more-tuples-than-atoms-in-the-universe query and then closed the terminal without realising it. A few days later the machine ran out of memory and died. Normally the client runs out of memory first but without a client it just keeps on going. [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-05/msg01386.php Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@xxxxxxxxx> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a > tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone > else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
Attachment:
pgpqm5tTC6bGE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
