> > Query timeout is good for queries that consume CPU resources and not > > finished in limited time. > > CPU is important but not the only resource. Yes, i know - time cost to take action as a whole like cpu + I/O + sync should cause timeout - statement as a whole
> > > But queries that feth e.g. 100 records for user and wait to fetch rest do > > not consume much resources > > and user can fetch (rest or next portion) e.g. after 10 minutes. > > It is too generic. Query could use 1GB for sorting and fetch very slow yes and fetch time of "portion" should be considered by timeout or maybe sumarize of fetches time - but memory consumption is different feature not releated to timeouts query can eat 1GB but run very fast and other can eat 10MB but work very very long > > > And that queries are not problem for DBA. Yes, such queries consume some > > resources but not extensivly. > > See above, it is not as easy. Also, such queries not allows to commit > corresponding transaction > and it could lead to blocked garbage collection, growing active part of TIP > and force other attachments > to consume more resources. yes but this is different feature like transaction timeouts - which is not so important from my POV i only talking about statement timeouts. And most systems i have seen operate without without transaction timeout feature because they check if some long running transaction is pending (query to MON$Transaction) and inform admins about details regards, Karol Bieniaszewski ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
