anole's failed timeouts test - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject anole's failed timeouts test
Date
Msg-id CAEepm=3j+-REWamecBWgRR4xSxfQ2d0XtYGehAVqTNeT6-wnBQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: anole's failed timeouts test  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hello,

 step lsto: SET lock_timeout = 5000; SET statement_timeout = 6000;
 step update: DELETE FROM accounts WHERE accountid = 'checking'; <waiting ...>
 step update: <... completed>
-ERROR:  canceling statement due to lock timeout
+ERROR:  canceling statement due to statement timeout

No matter how slow the machine is, how can you manage to get statement
timeout to fire first?  Given the coding that prefers lock timeouts if
there is a tie (unlikely), but otherwise processes them in registered
time order (assuming the clock only travels forward), well, I must be
missing something...

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: indxpath.c's references to IndexOptInfo.ncolumns are all wrong, no?
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: pg11.1: dsa_area could not attach to segment