Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5
Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres@cybertec.at>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-07-27T12:43:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera írta: > Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > > >> The vague consensus for syntax options was that the GUC >> 'lock_timeout' and WAIT [N] extension (wherever NOWAIT >> is allowed) both should be implemented. >> >> Behaviour would be that N seconds timeout should be >> applied to every lock that the statement would take. >> > > In http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/291.1242053201@sss.pgh.pa.us > Tom argues that lock_timeout should be sufficient. I'm not sure what > does WAIT [N] buy. > Syntax consistency with NOWAIT? -- Bible has answers for everything. Proof: "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:37) - basics of digital technology. "May your kingdom come" - superficial description of plate tectonics ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/