| From: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Curosity question regarding "LOCK" NOWAIT |
| Date: | 2012-09-22 04:35:18 |
| Message-ID: | 6A5B0E96-A4E5-43FE-889A-298F523EF518@yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sep 22, 2012, at 0:08, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
> On 09/21/12 7:43 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>> Has there been any discussion regarding adding a time-limited version of NOWAIT, say: “WAITONLY 50” (milliseconds), when dealing the explicit LOCK TABLE or the SELECT…FOR(SHARE|UPDATE) commands?
>
> is this a feature in any other major databases?
Doesn't matter to me...I'm only using PostgreSQL
>
> is this in the sql spec?
>
Guessing no if it is not implemented...
> what do you expect to happen if these timeouts expire? return an error, and abort the transaction?
>
The same thing that happens if "NOWAIT" had been specified instead.
The goal is to specify that I don't mind waiting but only for a short period of time.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jasen Betts | 2012-09-22 05:33:22 | Re: On Ubuntu 12.04 i do have two psql one of those isn't working |
| Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2012-09-22 04:11:25 | Question about upgrading extensions |