Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I think we'll want a version of this that just fails the > transaction once we have the infrastructure. So we should choose > a name that allows for a complimentary GUC.
If we stick with the rule that what is to the left of _timeout is what is being cancelled, the a GUC to cancel a transaction which remains idle for too long could be called idle_transaction_timeout. Do you disagree with the general idea of following that pattern? -- 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
