Re: timeout implementation issues

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us]
> 
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tom Lane
> > > 
> > > Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com> writes:
> > > >     Could  we  get  out  of  this  by  defining that "timeout" is
> > > >     automatically reset at next statement end?
> > > 
> > > I was hoping to avoid that, because it seems like a wart.  OTOH,
> > > it'd be less of a wart than the global changes of semantics that
> > > Bruce is proposing :-(
> > 
> > Probably I'm misunderstanding this thread.
> > Why must the query_timeout be reset particularly ?
> > What's wrong with simply issueing set query_timeout
> > command just before every query ?
> 
> You could do that, but we also imagine cases where people would want to
> set a timeout for each query in an entire session.

Sorry I couldn't understand your point.
It seems the simplest and the most certain way is to call 
'SET QUERY_TIMEOUT per query. The way dosen't require
RESET at all.  Is the overhead an issue ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue