Bruce Momjian írta: > Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote: > >> hello everybody, >> >> from my side the goal of this discussion is to extract a consensus so >> that we can go ahead and implement this issue for 8.5. >> our customer here needs a solution to this problem and we have to come >> up with something which can then make it into PostgreSQL core. >> how shall we proceed with the decision finding process here? >> i am fine with a GUC and with an grammar extension - i just need a >> decision which stays unchanged. >> > > Do we have answer for Hans-Juergen here? >
Do we? The vague consensus for syntax options was that the GUC 'lock_timeout' and WAIT [N] extension (wherever NOWAIT is allowed) both should be implemented. Behaviour would be that N seconds timeout should be applied to every lock that the statement would take. Can we go ahead implementing it? > I have added a vague TODO: > > Consider a lock timeout parameter > > * http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-05/msg00485.php > > -- Bible has answers for everything. Proof: "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:37) - basics of digital technology. "May your kingdom come" - superficial description of plate tectonics ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
