On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 11:01, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> >
> > > > The question is whether we should have a GUC variable to control no
> > > > waiting on locks or add NO WAIT to specific SQL commands.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone want to vote _against_ the GUC idea for nowait locking. (We
> > > > already have two voting for such a variable.)
> > >
> > > I vote against. We got bit by both the regex and the autocommit GUC vars
> > > and this is setting up to cause a similar headache with old code on new
> > > platforms.
> >
> > I vote for the GUC. Imho it is not comparable to the "autocommit" case,
> > since it does not change the way your appl needs to react (appl needs to
> > react to deadlock already).
> >
> > I personally think a wait period in seconds would be more useful.
> > Milli second timeouts tend to be misused with way too low values
> > in this case, imho.
>
> I understand, but GUC lost the vote. I have updated the TODO list to
> indicate this. Tatsuo posted a patch to add NO WAIT to the LOCK
> command, so we will see if we can get that into CVS.
>
Is it premature to add "allow vacuum command to use no wait semantics on
locks" to the TODO list?
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
