> -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > > 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 ? > > > > > > > > > > What about psql and libpq. Doing a timeout before every > query is a > > > > > pain. > > > > > > > > Psql and libpq would simply issue the query according to the > > > > user's request as they currently do. What's pain with it ? > > > > > > If they wanted to place a timeout on all queries in a session, they > > > would need a SET for every query, which seems like a pain. > > > > Oh I see. You mean users' pain ? > > Sorry I was unclear. > > > If a user wants to place a timeout on all the query, he > > would issue SET query_timeout command only once. > > I am confused. Above you state you want SET QUERY_TIMEOUT to be > per-query. I assume you mean that the timeout applies for only the next > query and is turned off after that.
Hmm there seems a misunderstanding between you and I but I don't see what it is. Does *SET QUERY_TIMEOUT* start a timer in your scenario ? In my scenario *SET QUERY_TIMEOUT* only registers the timeout value for subsequent queries. regards, Hiroshi inoue ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
