| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, david(at)fetter(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Statement timeout behavior in extended queries |
| Date: | 2017-04-05 13:46:31 |
| Message-ID: | 5692.1491399991@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-04-05 00:39:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> but
>> if that's what we're doing, let's make sure we do it consistently.
>> I haven't read the patch, but the comments in this thread make me fear
>> that it's introducing some ad-hoc, inconsistent behavior.
> I'm a bit worried too due to the time constraints here, but I think
> resetting the clock at Execute too actually makes a fair amount sense.
Meh. Two days before feature freeze is not the time to be introducing
a rushed redefinition of the wire protocol --- and let's not fool
ourselves, that is what this amounts to. Let's push this out to v11
and think about it more carefully.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-05 13:48:20 | Re: partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-05 13:43:53 | Re: partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql |