On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Why would this be any different from a cancel-signal-instigated abort? > You'd be reporting elog(ERROR) in any case.
If I understand the code correctly, in the case of a cancel signal, the driver sends the signal and then assumes that the backend has accepted it and cancelled; the back end does not report back. In this case, the driver would not be sending a signal, so it would not know that the process had reached the timeout and stopped (and it needs to know that). What we *could* do is have *both* the driver and the backend run timers and both stop when the timeout is reached. This seems like a solution just begging to produce ugly bugs, though -- and if we have to implement such a wait in the driver, we may as well implement the whole thing in the driver and just have it send a cancel signal when it times out. Or am I misunderstanding the situation? j ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
