From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Henryk Szal" <szal(at)doctorq(dot)com(dot)pl> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: timeout on lock feature |
Date: | 2001-04-18 00:13:47 |
Message-ID: | 7295.987552827@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Henryk Szal" <szal(at)doctorq(dot)com(dot)pl> writes:
> YES, this feature should affect ALL locks.
> 'Timeout on lock' parameter says to server "I CAN'T WAIT WITH THIS
> TRANSACTION TOO LONG BECAUSE OF (ANY) LOCK",
It still seems to me that what such an application wants is not a lock
timeout at all, but an overall limit on the total elapsed time for the
query. If you can't afford to wait to get a lock, why is it OK to wait
(perhaps much longer) for I/O or computation?
Such a limit would be best handled by sending a query-cancel request
when you run out of patience, it seems to me.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2001-04-18 00:28:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: three VERY minor things with 7.1 final |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-17 23:32:45 | Re: Fix for psql core dumping on bad user |