Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd accept a mechanism to enforce a timeout at the lock level if you
> could show me a convincing use-case for lock timeouts instead of
> statement timeouts, but I don't believe there is one. I think this
> proposal is a solution in search of a problem.
I think statement_timeout and lock_timeout are different.
If I set statement_timeout to 1000 to detect a lock timeout,
I can't run a query which takes over 1 sec.
If a lock wait is occured, I want to detect it immediately,
but I still want to run a long-running query.
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <nagayasus@nttdata.co.jp>