| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Henryk Szal <szal(at)doctorq(dot)com(dot)pl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | AW: AW: timeout on lock feature |
| Date: | 2001-04-17 15:30:13 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA68796336828E@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Added to TODO:
> > * Add SET parameter to timeout if waiting for lock too long
>
> I repeat my strong objection to any global (ie, affecting all locks)
> timeout. Such a "feature" will have unpleasant consequences.
Except that other people like myself, see those consequences
as a pleasant thing :-) And we are talking about something that has to be
requested by the client explicitly (at least in a default installation).
It simply does make sense for an interactive client to not block
more than ~ 30 seconds.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-17 15:31:14 | Re: AW: AW: timeout on lock feature |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2001-04-17 15:29:30 | AW: AW: timeout on lock feature |