Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The hard part looks to be cancelling/changing the timer, which means > that we can't just create a set and forget listener thread for a given > timeout. Otherwise that seems to me the straightforward approach.
Yeah. I think probably the cleanest way is to create a persistent thread that manages the timer. We need a way for the main thread to tell it to cancel the timer or change the setting. Dunno enough about Windows' interthread communication primitives to propose details. > I doubt the changes would be very invasive - with luck just confined to > timer.c. I don't see a need for anything else to know about it, either. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match