Re: timeout implementation issues

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jessica Perry Hekman <jphekman(at)dynamicdiagrams(dot)com>, Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues
Date: 2002-04-04 02:48:21
Message-ID: 3CABBEF5.BC06B4CF@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > > The current plan seems to be to make changes in the backend and the JDBC
> > > > interface, the bulk of the implementation being in the backend.
> > >
> > > Yes, ODBC and JDBC need this, and I am sure psql folks will use it too,
> > > not counting libpq and all the others.
> >
> > I wasn't able to follow this thread sorry.
> > ODBC has QUERY_TIMEOUT and CONNECTION_TIMEOUT.
> >
> > > We just need a way to specify statement-level SET options inside a
> > > transaction where the statement may fail and ignore the SET command that
> > > resets the timeout. We don't have any mechanism to reset the timeout
> > > parameter at the end of a transaction automatically,
> >
> > Why should the timeout be reset automatically ?
>
> It doesn't need to be reset automatically, but the problem is that if
> you are doing a timeout for single statement in a transaction, and that
> statement aborts the transaction, the SET command after it to reset the
> timeout fails.

As for ODBC, there's no state that *abort* but still inside
a transaction currently.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2002-04-04 03:41:05 What's the CURRENT schema ?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-04-04 02:21:53 Re: timeout implementation issues