| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | david(at)fetter(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org, rsmogura(at)softperience(dot)eu |
| Subject: | Re: [JDBC] Support for JDBC setQueryTimeout, et al. |
| Date: | 2010-10-14 15:28:25 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTikdL_EWgpmQe_=urhreO-LcRa3DbW_0tv-q+28x@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> Is this a JDBC patch or a PG patch? Are we tracking JDBC patches
>> using the CF app?
>
> If this were the only patch for setQueryTimeout in front of us I
> probably wouldn't have suggested that, but this thread started with a
> patch proposal to implement the same JDBC feature through adding new
> backend functions. Unless that patch is withdrawn or rejected, it
> seems odd for two different groups to be simultaneously considering
> patches to implement exactly the same functionality....
True. I thought we had decided on the client-side approach, but maybe
I'm confused. I don't have a position one way or the other, just
trying to understand the state of the conversation.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jesper Krogh | 2010-10-14 15:29:40 | Re: Slow count(*) again... |
| Previous Message | Brendan Jurd | 2010-10-14 15:24:17 | Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2010-10-14 15:32:54 | Re: [JDBC] Support for JDBC setQueryTimeout, et al. |
| Previous Message | Daniele Varrazzo | 2010-10-14 13:15:30 | XA Xid to PostgreSQL transaction ID |