X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C73D1CACE; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:49:44 +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 75519-05; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:49:14 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8F8D1CC89; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:49:13 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i0SGnCF8020370; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:49:12 -0500 (EST) To: Stef Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, "pgsql-sql@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: [SQL] postgres timeout. In-reply-to: <20040128121109.02f554e6.svb@ucs.co.za> References: <20040128121109.02f554e6.svb@ucs.co.za> Comments: In-reply-to Stef message dated "Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:11:09 +0200" Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:49:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20369.1075308552@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200401/292 X-Sequence-Number: 5466 Stef writes: > I'm trying to find out if there is a specific setting > to make transactions time out faster in a scenario > where there's an update on a table in a transaction > block, and another update process tries to update > the same column. > It looks like the second process will wait until you > end the transaction block in the first transaction. You can use statement_timeout to limit the wait. regards, tom lane