Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f070909211218uf4d66eam564e837052f37248@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5 (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: > >> Of course, I don't want: >> >> - GUCs that I'm going to set, execute one statement, and the unset >> (and this likely falls into that category). >> - GUCs that are poorly designed so that it's not clear, even to an >> experienced user, what value to set. >> - GUCs that exist only to work around the inability of the database to >> figure out the appropriate value without user input. >> >> On the flip side, rereading the thread, one major advantage of the GUC >> is that it can be used for statements other than SELECT, which >> hard-coded syntax can't. That might be enough to make me change my >> vote. > > Perhaps we'd benefit from a way to set a variable for a single query; > something like > > WITH ( SET query_lock_timeout = 5s ) SELECT ... > > Of course, this particular syntax doesn't work because WITH is already > taken. Yeah, I thought about that. I think that would be sweet. Maybe LET (query_lock_timeout = 5 s) IN SELECT ... ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: