Re: Transaction timeout

On Sun, 24 Dec 2023 at 01:14, Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>> On 22 Dec 2023, at 10:39, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I try to split the test for transaction timeout, and all passed on my CI [1].
>
>
> I like the refactoring you did in timeout.spec. I thought it is impossible, because permutations would try to reinitialize FATALed sessions. But, obviously, tests work the way you refactored it.
> However I don't think ignoring test failures on Windows without understanding root cause is a good idea.

Yeah.

> Let's get back to v13 version of tests, understand why it failed, apply your test refactorings afterwards. BTW are you sure that v14 refactorings are functional equivalent of v13 tests?
>
I think it is equivalent.  Maybe I missing something.  Please let me known
if they are not equivalent.

> To go with this plan I attach slightly modified version of v13 tests in v16 patchset. The only change is timing in "sleep_there" step. I suspect that failure was induced by more coarse timer granularity on Windows. Tests were giving only 9 milliseconds for a timeout to entirely wipe away backend from pg_stat_activity. This saves testing time, but might induce false positive test flaps. So I've raised wait times to 100ms. This seems too much, but I do not have other ideas how to ensure tests stability. Maybe 50ms would be enough, I do not know. Isolation runs ~50 seconds now. I'm tempted to say that 200ms for timeouts worth it.
>
So this is caused by Windows timer granularity?

> As to 2nd step "Try to enable transaction_timeout during transaction", I think this makes sense. But if we are doing so, shouldn't we also allow to enable idle_in_transaction timeout in a same manner?

I think the current idle_in_transaction_session_timeout work correctly.

> Currently we only allow to disable other timeouts... Also, if we are already in transaction, shouldn't we also subtract current transaction span from timeout?

Agreed.

> I think making this functionality as another step of the patchset was a good idea.
>

--
Regrads,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.