Tom Lane wrote:
> Jessica Perry Hekman <jphekman(at)dynamicdiagrams(dot)com> writes:
> > [snip]
> > My proposal, then, is that the Java driver should submit the
> > transaction request; wait for the timeout; if it goes off, submit a
> > cancel request; and then throw a SQLException. We would not handle
> > this in the backend at all.
> > Bruce agreed that this was a good point to ask what the rest of the
> > hackers list thought. Any input?
> I guess the $64 question is whether any frontends other than JDBC want
> this behavior. If it's JDBC-only then I'd certainly vote for making
> JDBC handle it ... but as soon as we see several different frontends
> implementing similar behavior, I'd say it makes sense to implement it
> once in the backend.
> So, what's the market?
There is clearly interest from all interfaces. This item has been
requested quite often, usually related to client apps or web apps.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Justin Clift||Date: 2002-03-30 05:29:15|
|Subject: Posix AIO in new Red Hat Linux |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-03-30 04:36:39|
|Subject: Re: timeout implementation issues |