From matyee@westel900.net Mon Oct  13 10:37:07 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F30D1B4E9
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:37:07 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 74937-03
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 13 Oct 2003 07:36:19 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from darmachakra.axelero.hu (fe03.axelero.hu [195.228.240.91])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C607D1B4E1
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 07:36:16 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1])
	by darmachakra.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9DAaCKH035064
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:36:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from fe03.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway
	by darmachakra.axelero.hu [195.228.240.91]; id A088B65268C
	at Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:36:11 +0200
Received: from pter (202.1-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.1.202])
	by fe03.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9DAa94t034923
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:36:10 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
From: "=?iso-8859-2?B?U3phYvMgUOl0ZXI=?=" <matyee@westel900.net>
To: <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Lock!
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:30:43 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0049_01C39185.D1F55520"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200310/138
X-Sequence-Number: 10699

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C39185.D1F55520
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi!

I have a lock problem. If i lock a record with SELECT FOR UPDATE, than i tr=
y to lock again, the process just wait until the record free. But i have to=
 send a message to the user like 'The record is locked, try later.'. But i =
can't. How can i do this?

Matyee

------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C39185.D1F55520
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-2">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2715.400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have a lock problem. If i lock a record =
with=20
SELECT FOR UPDATE, than i try to lock again, the process just wait until th=
e=20
record free. But i have to send a message to the user like 'The record is=
=20
locked, try later.'. But i can't. How can i do this?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Matyee</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0049_01C39185.D1F55520--





From matyee@mail.alba.hu Mon Oct  13 10:39:37 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [64.117.224.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDCDFD1B503
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:39:37 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([64.117.224.193])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [64.117.224.130]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 65656-07
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 13 Oct 2003 07:38:50 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from fe05.axelero.hu (fe05.axelero.hu [195.228.240.93])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3503D1B517
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 07:38:46 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1])
	by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9DAcnfN002484
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:38:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from fe05.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway
	by fe05 [195.228.240.93]; id A009ACF3201
	at Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:38:48 +0200
Received: from pter (202.1-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.1.202])
	by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9DAcmnP002466
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:38:48 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <006001c39175$6d8771a0$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
From: "=?iso-8859-2?B?U3phYvMgUOl0ZXI=?=" <matyee@mail.alba.hu>
To: <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Lock!
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:33:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005D_01C39186.30DDE700"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200310/130
X-Sequence-Number: 10691

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_005D_01C39186.30DDE700
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi!

I have a lock problem. If i lock a record with SELECT FOR UPDATE, than i tr=
y to lock again, the process just wait until the record free. But i have to=
 send a message to the user like 'The record is locked, try later.'. But i =
can't. How can i do this?

Matyee

------=_NextPart_000_005D_01C39186.30DDE700
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-2">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2715.400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have a lock problem. If i lock a record =
with=20
SELECT FOR UPDATE, than i try to lock again, the process just wait until th=
e=20
record free. But i have to send a message to the user like 'The record is=
=20
locked, try later.'. But i can't. How can i do this?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Matyee</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_005D_01C39186.30DDE700--





From olly@lfix.co.uk Tue Oct  14 16:30:11 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D612DD1B57E
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:30:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 35238-08
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:29:41 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net
	[194.217.242.87])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD2D0D1B533
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:27:57 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from lfix.demon.co.uk ([80.177.205.209] helo=cerberus.lfix.co.uk)
	by anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 1A9S1d-000PEB-0b; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:27:57 +0100
Received: from linda.lfix.co.uk ([192.168.1.1])
	by cerberus.lfix.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.22)
	id 1A9S1Z-00058I-Jg; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:27:53 +0100
Subject: Re: Lock!
From: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Szab=F3_P=E9ter?= <matyee@westel900.net>
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
References: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Organization: LFIX Limited
Message-Id: <1066148873.5581.67.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:27:53 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-LFIX-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200310/140
X-Sequence-Number: 10701

On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 11:30, Szab=F3 P=E9ter wrote:
> Hi!
>=20=20
> I have a lock problem. If i lock a record with SELECT FOR UPDATE, than
> i try to lock again, the process just wait until the record free. But
> i have to send a message to the user like 'The record is locked, try
> later.'. But i can't. How can i do this?

You can't.

Quote from the manual:
        So long as no deadlock situation is detected, a transaction
        seeking either a table-level or row-level lock will wait
        indefinitely for conflicting locks to be released. This means it
        is a bad idea for applications to hold transactions open for
        long periods of time (e.g., while waiting for user input).
=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20
You need to rethink your application.

What I have done is to read the data with SELECT.  Just before changing
it I do SELECT FOR UPDATE and tell the user if anything he is changing
has changed since he read it in.  If there has been no change, I go
ahead with the UPDATE.  This means that records are only locked for a
very short time.  Now, instead of the possibility of being locked out
for a long time, there is a possibility of having to throw away some
editing, but I estimate that to be less of a cost overall.

--=20
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK                             http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
                 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
     "I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is=20
      within my heart."             Psalms 40:8=20




From cbbrowne@acm.org Tue Oct  14 19:12:46 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD36D1B4ED
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:12:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 74048-01
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:12:17 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D29CFD1B543
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:12:15 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72])
	by news.hub.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9EJCFO0030395
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:12:15 GMT
	(envelope-from news@news.hub.org)
Received: (from news@localhost)
	by news.hub.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h9EJ4TVL029062
	for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:04:29 GMT
From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.admin
Subject: Re: Lock!
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:00:11 -0400
Organization: cbbrowne Computing Inc
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <m3zng33aro.fsf@chvatal.cbbrowne.com>
References: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
	<1066148873.5581.67.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org
X-message-flag: Outlook is rather hackable, isn't it?
X-Home-Page: http://www.cbbrowne.com/info/
X-Affero: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) XEmacs/21.4 (Reasonable Discussion,
	linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RBtWiIGjRiJft5bBL+7RgT772xg=
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200310/143
X-Sequence-Number: 10704

In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, olly@lfix.co.uk (Oliver Elphick) transmitted:
> On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 11:30, Szabó Péter wrote:
>> Hi!
>>  
>> I have a lock problem. If i lock a record with SELECT FOR UPDATE, than
>> i try to lock again, the process just wait until the record free. But
>> i have to send a message to the user like 'The record is locked, try
>> later.'. But i can't. How can i do this?
>
> You can't.
>
> Quote from the manual:
>         So long as no deadlock situation is detected, a transaction
>         seeking either a table-level or row-level lock will wait
>         indefinitely for conflicting locks to be released. This means it
>         is a bad idea for applications to hold transactions open for
>         long periods of time (e.g., while waiting for user input).
>         
> You need to rethink your application.
>
> What I have done is to read the data with SELECT.  Just before changing
> it I do SELECT FOR UPDATE and tell the user if anything he is changing
> has changed since he read it in.  If there has been no change, I go
> ahead with the UPDATE.  This means that records are only locked for a
> very short time.  Now, instead of the possibility of being locked out
> for a long time, there is a possibility of having to throw away some
> editing, but I estimate that to be less of a cost overall.

Another strategy that some of our folks have been trying out is that
of "optimistic locking."

It's an in-the-application scheme, which is arguably not totally
ideal, but it has the not-inconsiderable merit that its cost is _very_
low for the common case where there is no conflict.

General idea: You start by SELECTing a lock field on the data you want
to update.  SELECT STUFF, LOCK_FIELD FROM SOME_RELATION;

When you actually do the update, you do it as:

 UPDATE SOME_RELATION SET THIS='This', THAT='That', LOCK_FIELD=txn_id
   WHERE [normal criteria] AND LOCK_FIELD='Value_I_Found_Earlier';

If the record has been updated, then LOCK_FIELD will have a different
value, and this transaction fails; you'll have to do something to
recover, probably a ROLLBACK, and perhaps a retry.

On the other hand, if the record _hasn't_ been touched by anyone else,
then this change will go through, and there wasn't any costly locking
done in the DBMS.

It's not new; it was presented in the IEEE Transactions on Software
Engineering back in '91, and that might not be its genesis...

<http://www.computer.org/tse/ts1991/e0712abs.htm>

There's discussion of it in a Squeak  Wiki...
<http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2634>

It seems to have become publicly popular in the Java world, presumably
due to them finding it expensive to do pessimistic locking (e.g. - as
in starting out with the SELECT FOR UPDATE).
-- 
output = ("aa454" "@" "freenet.carleton.ca")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/linux.html
debugging, v:
        Removing the needles from the haystack.



From angch@bytecraft.com.my Wed Oct  15 04:30:06 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36288D1B524
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 15 Oct 2003 04:30:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 69547-04
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:29:35 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from gateway.vault-id.com (unknown [203.115.192.108])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 13E1FD1B4F4
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:29:28 -0300 (ADT)
Received: (qmail 19572 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2003 04:10:15 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO bytecraft.com.my) (219.93.229.26)
	by mail.bytecraft.com.my with SMTP; 15 Oct 2003 04:10:15 -0000
Message-ID: <3F8CCC7F.6@bytecraft.com.my>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:26:39 +0800
From: Ang Chin Han <angch@bytecraft.com.my>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030225
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Szab=F3_P=E9ter?= <matyee@westel900.net>,
	pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Lock!
References: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
	<1066148873.5581.67.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1066148873.5581.67.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.71.0.0
X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="------------enig7451EC7D9C91AC049309A543"
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200310/150
X-Sequence-Number: 10711

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig7451EC7D9C91AC049309A543
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Oliver Elphick wrote:
> You can't.
> 
> Quote from the manual:
>         So long as no deadlock situation is detected, a transaction
>         seeking either a table-level or row-level lock will wait
>         indefinitely for conflicting locks to be released. This means it
>         is a bad idea for applications to hold transactions open for
>         long periods of time (e.g., while waiting for user input).

Unless you set STATEMENT_TIMEOUT:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/runtime-config.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-GENERAL

In other words, try:

SET STATEMENT_TIMEOUT=50;
SELECT * FROM foo WHERE foo_id = 1 FOR UPDATE;

That means if another process is locking foo_id = 1 row for more than 50 
millisecond after you try to SELECT it FOR UPDATE, you'll get an 
error/rollback, and you can then assume it's being used.

Just remember to reset STATEMENT_TIMEOUT to zero or your default before 
any slow queries in that transaction.


There was some discussion about emulating (IIRC) Oracle's SELECT .. FOR 
UPDATE NOWAIT somewhere in the Postgresql archives. Look them up for 
more details.

--------------enig7451EC7D9C91AC049309A543
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/jMyCNYbTUIgzwfARAm7UAKCP8QuGDKhWA5WeTCtEW1PkrhqY4gCfSv5p
obAe6j8Hpc1OESXl5be9/2E=
=MaNL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig7451EC7D9C91AC049309A543--




From tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us Wed Oct  15 15:27:44 2003
X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7608CD1B54F
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:27:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 68264-10
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:27:13 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64CCAD1B547
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:27:12 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9FFQrhn015775;
	Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:26:53 -0400 (EDT)
To: Ang Chin Han <angch@bytecraft.com.my>
Cc: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>,
	=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Szab=F3_P=E9ter?= <matyee@westel900.net>,
	pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Lock! 
In-reply-to: <3F8CCC7F.6@bytecraft.com.my> 
References: <004c01c39175$0f0b3620$2702a8c0@WorkGroup>
	<1066148873.5581.67.camel@linda.lfix.co.uk>
	<3F8CCC7F.6@bytecraft.com.my>
Comments: In-reply-to Ang Chin Han <angch@bytecraft.com.my>
	message dated "Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:26:39 +0800"
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:26:52 -0400
Message-ID: <15774.1066231612@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200310/155
X-Sequence-Number: 10716

Ang Chin Han <angch@bytecraft.com.my> writes:
> Just remember to reset STATEMENT_TIMEOUT to zero or your default before 
> any slow queries in that transaction.

Also, you can use "SET LOCAL ..." to constrain the effects of the SET
command; this is probably safer than trying to remember to reset the
variable when you're done.

			regards, tom lane