> "Henryk Szal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > YES, this feature should affect ALL locks. > > 'Timeout on lock' parameter says to server "I CAN'T WAIT WITH THIS > > TRANSACTION TOO LONG BECAUSE OF (ANY) LOCK", > > It still seems to me that what such an application wants is not a lock > timeout at all, but an overall limit on the total elapsed time for the > query. If you can't afford to wait to get a lock, why is it OK to wait > (perhaps much longer) for I/O or computation? Yes, that is a valid argument. The only thing I can counter is that (in OLTP) it is usually easy to predict the amount of work that needs to be done for your own tx (we are typically talking about 1 - 200 ms here), but it is not easy to predict how long another session needs to complete it's transaction (the other session might be OLAP, vacuum ...). Andreas ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
