Horton

Re: Strange Windows problem, lock_timeout test request

Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Hari Babu <haribabu.kommi@huawei.com>, 'Craig Ringer' <craig@2ndQuadrant.com>, 'Hans-Jürgen Schönig' <hs@cybertec.at>, 'Ants Aasma' <ants@cybertec.at>, 'PostgreSQL Hackers' <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, 'Amit kapila' <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
Date: 2013-02-27T19:38:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
2013-02-27 20:06 keltezéssel, Stephen Frost írta:
> Zoltan,
>
> * Boszormenyi Zoltan (zb@cybertec.at) wrote:
>> If we get rid of the per-statement variant, there is no need for that either.
> For my 2c, I didn't see Tom's comments as saying that we shouldn't have
> that capability, just that the implementation was ugly. :)

But I am happy to drop it. ;-)

> That said, perhaps we should just drop it for now, get the lock_timeout
> piece solid, and then come back to the question about lock_timeout_stmt.

OK, let's do it this way.

>
> 	Thanks,
>
> 		Stephen


-- 
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
      http://www.postgresql.at/