| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shridhar(at)frodo(dot)hserus(dot)net |
| Cc: | "Saleem Burhani Baloch" <peseek(at)khi(dot)wol(dot)net(dot)pk>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Slow response of PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2004-02-20 14:34:31 |
| Message-ID: | 87d689es5k.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar(at)frodo(dot)hserus(dot)net> writes:
> Right now, it is hotly debated on HACKERS about adding a NOWAIT
> clause to SELECT FOR UPDATE. If you think your application
> deployment is away for months and can try CVS head, you can expect
> some action on it in coming few days.
You can also try using the statement_timeout configuration variable
that is already included with 7.4. It's not exactly "don't wait for
locks", but should approximate that behavior well enough.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/runtime-config.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-CLIENT
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ohp | 2004-02-20 14:51:00 | Re: Slow in morning hours |
| Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2004-02-20 13:48:54 | Re: Slow in morning hours |