On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is it worth thinking about having an explicit setting for deadlock
> priority? That'd be more work, of course, and I'm not sure it it's
> worth it, but it'd also provide stronger guarantees than you can get
> with this proposal.
Priority makes better sense, I think.
That's what we're trying to control after all.
But you would need to change the way the deadlock detector works...
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-03-29 13:20:38|
|Subject: Re: deadlock_timeout at < PGC_SIGHUP? |
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-03-29 12:26:44|
|Subject: Re: deadlock_timeout at < PGC_SIGHUP?|