Re: Implementing setQueryTimeout()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL - JDBC <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Implementing setQueryTimeout()
Date: 2008-02-19 01:20:54
Message-ID: 17814.1203384054@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
> I'd argue that "close connection on network timeout if setQueryTimeout()
> is set" is better than "do absolutely nothing special if
> setQueryTimeout() is set", anyway. If you don't want queries being
> aborted because they are taking too long to complete.. don't set a query
> timeout!

I think it's a serious, serious conceptual error to tie network timeouts
to query timeouts. Maybe your specific application needs them to be the
same, but implementing something that forces them to be the same is a
good way to guarantee that your work won't be generally useful or
acceptable for the mainstream driver.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul Tomblin 2008-02-19 01:23:45 Re: Getting "This ResultSet is closed" exceptions
Previous Message Jan de Visser 2008-02-19 01:17:58 Re: Getting "This ResultSet is closed" exceptions