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

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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to