>> 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.

Yes, Tsunakawa-san is correct. Sorry for confusion.

> 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.


If you don't mind, could you please fix the comments and push it.

> 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.

That will be great.

Best regards,
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php

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

Reply via email to