On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 16:42 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > So, in summary, the position is that we have a timeout, but that timeout
> > doesn't work in all cases. But it does work in some, so that seems
> > enough for me to say "let's commit". Not committing gives us nothing at
> > all, which is as much use as a chocolate teapot.
> >
> > I will be looking to commit this tomorrow morning, unless I hear some
> > clear No comments, with reasons.
>
> I guess the question is whether it works in 10% of cases or 95% of
> cases. In the first case there's probably no point in pretending we
> have a feature if it doesn't really work. In the second case, it
> might make sense. But I don't have a good feeling for which it is.
Well, I guess the people that wanted to wait forever may get their wish.
For sync rep, I intend to put in place a client timeout, which we do
have code for. The server side timeout still makes sense, but it's not a
requirement for sync rep.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
