| From: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu> |
| Cc: | "AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu" <AYahorau(at)ibagroup(dot)eu>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | RE: Timeout parameters |
| Date: | 2019-03-18 00:53:12 |
| Message-ID: | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FBDBBD7@G01JPEXMBYT05 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu [mailto:MikalaiKeida(at)ibagroup(dot)eu]
> Based on your comment it seems to me that 'socket_timeout' should be
> connected with statement_timeout. I mean that end-user should wait
> statement_timeout + 'socket_timeout' for returning control. It looks much
> more safer for me.
I'm afraid we cannot enforce that relationship programmatically, so I think the documentation should warn that socket_timeout be longer than statement_timeout.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-03-18 00:59:25 | Re: Making all nbtree entries unique by having heap TIDs participate in comparisons |
| Previous Message | Chapman Flack | 2019-03-18 00:46:40 | Determine if FOR UPDATE or FOR SHARE was used? |