Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout

Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Hmm, AFAIR subsequent investigation led to the discovery that autovacuum
> >> is not affected by statement_timeout.
>
> > Right -- see
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general/80044/focus=93847
>
> Or even more to the point, look into autovacuum.c:
>
> /*
> * Force statement_timeout to zero to avoid a timeout setting from
> * preventing regular maintenance from being executed.
> */
> SetConfigOption("statement_timeout", "0", PGC_SUSET, PGC_S_OVERRIDE);
>
> > So your documentation changes are incorrect.
>
> Indeed. But wasn't the start of this thread a mention that pg_dump
> ought to have a similar defense? AFAIR it does not, so there's still
> a small TODO.

OK, I have added a documentation mention but removed the mention of
autovacuum. I have also added this TODO:

o Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by
statement_timeout

Using psql to restore a pg_dump dump is also affected.

Particularly consider using psql to restore a pg_dump dump --- are we
going to add "SET statement_timeout=0" to the pg_dump file?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +