| From: | Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Jessica Perry Hekman <jphekman(at)dynamicdiagrams(dot)com>, Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Date: | 2002-04-08 14:15:18 |
| Message-ID: | 200204081415.g38EFI712228@saturn.janwieck.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Sorry I couldn't understand your point.
> > > > It seems the simplest and the most certain way is to call
> > > > 'SET QUERY_TIMEOUT per query. The way dosen't require
> > > > RESET at all. Is the overhead an issue ?
> > >
> > > What about psql and libpq. Doing a timeout before every query is a
> > > pain.
> >
> > Psql and libpq would simply issue the query according to the
> > user's request as they currently do. What's pain with it ?
>
> If they wanted to place a timeout on all queries in a session, they
> would need a SET for every query, which seems like a pain.
Er, how many "applications" have you implemented by simply
providing a schema and psql?
I mean, users normally don't use psql. And if you do, what's
wrong with controlling the timeout yourself and hitting ^C
when "you" time out? If you do it in a script, it's
yy... p p p p p.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-04-08 14:46:11 | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-08 14:08:17 | Re: timeout implementation issues |