Re: Statement timeout behavior in extended queries
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>, tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com, david@fetter.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2017-04-05T14:33:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2017-04-05 09:46:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2017-04-05 00:39:51 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> but > >> if that's what we're doing, let's make sure we do it consistently. > >> I haven't read the patch, but the comments in this thread make me fear > >> that it's introducing some ad-hoc, inconsistent behavior. > > > I'm a bit worried too due to the time constraints here, but I think > > resetting the clock at Execute too actually makes a fair amount sense. > > Meh. Two days before feature freeze is not the time to be introducing > a rushed redefinition of the wire protocol --- and let's not fool > ourselves, that is what this amounts to. Let's push this out to v11 > and think about it more carefully. What I was trying to say is that I think the change makes sense and isn't particularly ad-hoc, but that I don't think we need to force this for v10. Greetings, Andres Freund
Commits
-
Rearm statement_timeout after each executed query.
- f8e5f156b30e 11.0 landed