Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5
Date
Msg-id 20090727122039.GC6459@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5  (Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>)
Responses Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5  (Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>)
Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5  (Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:

> The vague consensus for syntax options was that the GUC
> 'lock_timeout' and WAIT [N] extension (wherever NOWAIT
> is allowed) both should be implemented.
> 
> Behaviour would be that N seconds timeout should be
> applied to every lock that the statement would take.

In http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/291.1242053201@sss.pgh.pa.us
Tom argues that lock_timeout should be sufficient.  I'm not sure what
does WAIT [N] buy.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan
Date:
Subject: Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5
Next
From: Bernd Helmle
Date:
Subject: Re: CommitFest Status Summary - 2009-07-25