Dmitry, > That said, I'd vote against reworking the current design. Perhaps, we could > additionally implement what Sean suggests, but *only* at the server side.
I expected that the "ExecutionQuota" would be something only executed at the server side, since that is the only place where the appropriate counter/timer could be maintained. But the reality is that the new timeouts are just implemented at the server side, no? > But I have no idea how to mix them nicely. Having two independent timeouts > looks ugly, complicates the engine code and is likely to confuse users. Really, to my mind the new quota feature would simply require that wherever the current timeout is tested, a separate test would be added to compare the statement "Runtime". If any times exceeds their limit, the statement would be cancelled. The only difference between the timers and the quota would be that the quota time accumulation would stop/start around fetches. Sean ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
