Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > The idea with the GUC name is that if we ever get support for > cancelling transactions we can name that > idle_in_transaction_transaction_timeout? > That seems a bit awkward...
No, the argument was that for all the other *_timeout settings what came before _timeout was the thing that was being terminated. I think there were some votes in favor of the name on that basis, and none against. Feel free to give your reasons for supporting some other name. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
