On 2017-04-04 06:35:00 +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > From: Andres Freund [mailto:and...@anarazel.de] > Given the concern raised in > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/12207.1491228316%40sss.pgh.p > > a.us > > I don't see this being ready for committer. > > If what Tatsuo-san said to Tom is correct (i.e. each Parse/Bind/Execute > starts and stops the timer), then it's a concern and the patch should not be > ready for committer. However, the current patch is not like that -- it seems > to do what others in this thread are expecting.
Oh, interesting - I kind of took the author's statement as, uh, authoritative ;). A quick look over the patch confirms your understanding. I think the code needs a few clarifying comments around this, but otherwise seems good. Not restarting the timeout in those cases obviously isn't entirely "perfect"/"correct", but a tradeoff - the comments should note that. Tatsuo-san, do you want to change those, and push? I can otherwise. Unfortunately I can't move the patch back to the current CF, but I guess we can just mark it as committed in the next. - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers