Re: Strange Windows problem, lock_timeout test request

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/27/2013 09:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Boszormenyi Zoltan (zb(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
>> But unlike statement_timeout,
>> with lock_timeout_stmt the statement can still finish after this limit
>> as it does useful work besides waiting for locks.
>
> It's still entirely possible to get 99% done and then hit that last
> tuple that you need a lock on and just tip over the lock_timeout_stmt
> limit due to prior waiting and ending up wasting a bunch of work, hence
> why I'm not entirely sure that this is that much better than
> statement_timeout.

There are questions about whether this is a good idea, and there's still
discussion ongoing. It doesn't look like it's in a state where we can
confidently say "let's include this for 9.3" to me, but I'd like other
viewpoints.

Should we bump this to the next CF? It's clearly still a viable idea,
just possibly not ready yet.

- --
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRNBTkAAoJELBXNkqjr+S2qd0H+gMdDFmoWLJbqw1IvlopTTiz
LtYr/lkmiRVFFOPgcAMwrDrTzT1AkGIHbkYd0erXqRUNsSrFY9O3FabyQYfo9QG2
5HhvZkmNxf+WFyaqpg1gq/L1pm+2gr0o0N3GabmJTmg9JO7sf1BUBv/EdImaq1CT
lARJXXNC5vI/sVr2P/GpazCzl2120t+ZM9QGyqqqrz6e5t3BjpkGR4Y7MxyVkcfs
hDOpVIoXMDwOZVJTojLHLqeBdjOljRhCjgkqHKXii9ZUBCs5jFGBT/yOQCTwA2xo
YyHbJt+7VJm/lTvG379Q/vXMvIAZkbWtENOwKokwPThlq2HDAAEluZ8U7h5/8i4=
=49I0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----