How about for the sessionId? Should that be idle time rather than ttl too?

Isn't it possible though that a server might want to expire a result set (or
session), no matter how much activity. By using idle time rather than ttl in
effect you're promising to keep the result set or session around forever (as
long as there's activity). Are you sure you want to do that?

--Ray

"LeVan,Ralph" wrote:

> Yes, we agreed that it was relative time, not absolute.  But, could we make
> that idle time?  If the result set continues to be active, then it shouldn't
> go away.  Yes, I know that I could send a new timeout with each reference,
> but what's the need?  I'd rather tell the client once, when the result set
> is created.
>
> Ralph