Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com> writes:
> Could we get out of this by defining that "timeout" is
> automatically reset at next statement end?
I was hoping to avoid that, because it seems like a wart. OTOH,
it'd be less of a wart than the global changes of semantics that
Bruce is proposing :-(
How exactly would you make this happen? The simplest way I can think of
to do it (reset timeout in outer loop in postgres.c) would not work,
because it'd reset the timeout as soon as the SET statement completes.
How would you get the setting to survive for exactly one additional
statement?
regards, tom lane