Re: timeout implementation issues

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I am still looking for a constructive idea on how we can get this to
> work, rather than calling my ideas "ridiculous".

We know very well how to make it work: JDBC can issue a SET timeout = 0
after exiting the transaction.  You're proposing to change the semantics
of SET into something quite bizarre in order to allow JDBC to not have
to work as hard.  I think that's a bad tradeoff.
        regards, tom lane