| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL - JDBC <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Implementing setQueryTimeout() |
| Date: | 2008-02-19 01:20:54 |
| Message-ID: | 17814.1203384054@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
> I'd argue that "close connection on network timeout if setQueryTimeout()
> is set" is better than "do absolutely nothing special if
> setQueryTimeout() is set", anyway. If you don't want queries being
> aborted because they are taking too long to complete.. don't set a query
> timeout!
I think it's a serious, serious conceptual error to tie network timeouts
to query timeouts. Maybe your specific application needs them to be the
same, but implementing something that forces them to be the same is a
good way to guarantee that your work won't be generally useful or
acceptable for the mainstream driver.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul Tomblin | 2008-02-19 01:23:45 | Re: Getting "This ResultSet is closed" exceptions |
| Previous Message | Jan de Visser | 2008-02-19 01:17:58 | Re: Getting "This ResultSet is closed" exceptions |