| From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Henryk Szal <szal(at)doctorq(dot)com(dot)pl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: AW: AW: timeout on lock feature |
| Date: | 2001-04-17 18:12:08 |
| Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D33AC@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > The timeout will be useful to let the client or user decide
> > on an alternate course of action other that killing his
> > application (without the need for timers or threads in the
> > client program).
>
> This assumes (without evidence) that the client has a good
> idea of what the timeout limit ought to be. I think this "feature"
> has no real use other than encouraging application programmers to
> shoot themselves in the foot. I see no reason that we should make
> it easy to misdesign applications.
AFAIR, Big Boys have this feature. If its implementation is safe,
ie will not affect applications not using it, why do not implement it?
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Myers | 2001-04-17 18:13:01 | Re: Another news story in need of 'enlightenment' |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-17 17:51:29 | Re: Re: [PATCHES] Patch for PostgreSQL 7.0.3 to compile on Tru64 UNIX v5.0A |