Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> The idea with the GUC name is that if we ever get support for
> cancelling transactions we can name that
> idle_in_transaction_transaction_timeout?
> That seems a bit awkward...
No, the argument was that for all the other *_timeout settings what
came before _timeout was the thing that was being terminated. I
think there were some votes in favor of the name on that basis, and
none against. Feel free to give your reasons for supporting some
other name.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
