Cancel threads after timeout

hyperboreean hyperboreean at
Sun Jan 27 10:51:49 CET 2013

On 01/26, Matt Jones wrote:

The SQL part is not under control and getting it there requires more
development time than the management is willing to allocate. So this
would be a first step before refactoring that part. I'm aware that the
database might not notice that I don't want to receive the result of the
query, but I'm willing to assume that risk for now.

Thank you.
> It sounds like your real problem is with your SQL query...  Is that part of
> this problem under your control?  Can you break the query into smaller,
> quicker, pieces that you can run in a reasonable amount of time?
> If not, nesting threads might be your best programmatic solution.  Heed
> Jason's warning though that the SQL Server my still be working even if you
> cancel an operation from the outside (which could compound your problem).
> *Matt Jones*
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jason Friedman <jsf80238 at> wrote:
> > > Sometimes it happens that a query on one of the database servers
> > > takes longer than expected and impedes the generation of this report
> > > (that's right, the queries are ran sequential). What I am trying to
> > > achieve is to parallelize the queries on each database server and to be
> > > able to cancel one of them if it takes longer than X minutes.
> >
> > Only answering a small portion of your question ....
> > Assuming you are able to figure out how to "cancel" a thread or
> > process on your side, it is possible the database itself will not
> > respect that.  In other words, if you execute "SELECT ..." singly,
> > outside of Python, and type CNTL-C, does your database quickly
> > recognize you are no longer interested in the result set and stop its
> > work?
> > --
> >
> >

> -- 

More information about the Python-list mailing list