Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1

Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
>> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> 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