From: | Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah(at)trade-india(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp |
Subject: | Re: case for lock_timeout |
Date: | 2004-07-01 03:47:48 |
Message-ID: | 40E38964.8090301@trade-india.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
><mallah(at)trade-india(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>I feel lock_timeout it will be a nice feature . Lemme know what would be
>>the solution of the above problem from existing set of features.
>>
>>
>
>AFAICS statement_timeout would work just fine for that; or you could
>use NOWAIT.
>
>
ok, you mean we should put statement timeout with statements
that potentially lock table exclusively. eg
OTHER SQLS 1....
set statement_timeout = <some reasonable time>
DROP TABLE table_name;
set statement_timeout = 0;
OTHER SQLS 2....
BTW does drop table or alter table have any other reasons
to timeout other than waiting for a lock ? In former case
the query will get cancelled for an invalid reason.
Regds
mallah.
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-01 03:50:24 | Re: Problems restarting after database crashed (signal 11). |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-07-01 03:46:43 | Re: backups |