Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1

"Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general,gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.patches
Organization Command Prompt, Inc.
Message-ID <[email protected]> 
Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
>> "Joshua D. Drake" <[email protected]> writes:

>>   
> 
> i don't think statement_timeout is a good idea at all.
> it is not deterministic. depending on the load on the server some 
> queries will execute while others fail.
> a separate GUC is needed.

I don't think we need to add clutter to GUC for something that exists to 
handle the problem at hand. If our real concern is server utilization 
based on user or query resources we need to look at an overall solution 
for that issue not a one off for a single feature.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.