Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 09:45 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Making the code more complicated so that it's easier to tune something
>> that isn't very hard to tune anyway doesn't seem like a good
>> trade-off.
> I think that just making sure that pessimal cases don't happen should be
> enough, maybe just check for too-much-time-in-transaction after each N
> pages touched.
If people think that a runtime limit is the most natural way to control
this, I don't see a reason not to do it that way. I would envision
checking the elapsed time once per page or few pages; shouldn't be a
huge amount of effort or complication ...
regards, tom lane
