Re: Re: timeout on lock feature

My typical short transaction run in 3 seconds (on heavy loaded system 30
sec.). But without 'timeout
on lock' it can run 60-180 minutes because someone (user or administrator)
run long transaction.
Timeout value is negligible. I set one to 10 sec. because if my two (3 sec.)
transaction are in conflict, then
both will be executed (second 3 sec. later).

Ian Lance Taylor wrote in message ...
>"Henryk Szal" <szal(at)doctorq(dot)com(dot)pl> writes:
>
>> YES, I DO! My transaction can't wait.
>> If parser on planner is blocked, then i want to abort my transaction.
>
>What are your actual timing constraints? Is the constraint ``no
>database table access may take longer than 10 seconds?'' Or is it
>``no database transaction may take longer than 10 seconds?'' Or is
>the constraint ``this operation may not take longer than 10 seconds?''
>
>If the first is the actual constraint, then indeed a timeout on table
>access is appropriate. But that would be a weird constraint. Can you
>explain further why you need this?
>
>If the second is the actual constraint, that also sounds strange; a
>database transaction is not normally a complete transaction. You
>usually have to worry about other communication overhead.
>
>If the third is the actual constraint, then shouldn't you do the
>timeout at the operation level, rather than at the database level?
>What is preventing you from doing that?
>
>Ian
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3988: A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't
broken.
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl