ronzo wrote: > Hi > > Was already implemented the timeout on the "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE" > (non-blocking lock) and/or is possible known if the lock exist on the > specified ROW before executing the SELECT? > > Please note: ours need is the timeout/verify at the ROW level, not at the > table level. > > Is already OK? Is in the TODO list? > May you suggest an alternative method?
We have discussed this at length and no one could state why having an timeout per lock is any better than using a statement_timeout. We can not do a NOWAIT on a single SELECT because there are alot of locks used even for a select and having them fail randomly would be useless. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
