Re: timeout implementation issues

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz> writes:
> >  It's good point. Why not make it more transparent? You want
> >  encapsulate it to standard and current SET statement, but if it's
> >  something different why not use for it different statement?
> 
> >     SET SESSION search_path TO 'something';
> 
> But a plain SET is also setting the value for the session.  What's
> the difference?  Why should a user remember that he must use this
> syntax for search_path, and not for any other variables (or perhaps
> only one or two other ones, further down the road)?

ISTM what Karel meant is that if the search_path is a
much more significant variable than others you had better
express the difference using a different statement.
I agree with Karel though I don't know how siginificant
the varible is.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue