Yep, we get asked to do that quite often. Use statement_timeout before the LOCK command. If the timeout happens, the LOCK, and hence transaction will abort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hermit Hacker wrote: > > Simple (I think) question ... is there a way of having an application > attempt to acquire a LOCK on a table *without* it blocking? Right now, if > you try to LOCK a table that another process has LOCKed, it will hang > indefinitely waiting for the other LOCK to drop ... is there a way of > setting a 'timer' so that if it doesn't acquire a LOCK in n secs, it just > fails and reports it back to the application? > > Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy > Systems Administrator @ hub.org > primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary: [EMAIL PROTECTED]|postgresql}.org > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
