Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_dump lock timeout

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net>
Subject: Re: pg_dump lock timeout
Date: 2008-07-03 01:33:46
Message-ID: 20080703013346.GP31154@tamriel.snowman.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Dave,

  Just a few comments regarding your pg_dump lock timeout patch (in
  general I like the concept and agree with adding it):

  - No validity checking that the argument passed in has anything to do
	with a number.  The backend will do this, but it strikes me as a bit
	odd to not do any checking at argument processing time.

  - You call the argument 'wait time' in the documentation, but 'DELAY'
	in the command-line help.  I'd recommend using one term and sticking
	to it.  You're already two lines in the command-line help, you can
	spell it out as 'WAIT_TIME' or similar.

  - getTables() uses different variables for each query, and I'm
	inclined to agree with that approach to make following the code
	easier.  I'd encourage you to add a new variable for the
	statement_timeout query rather than reusing the lockqry variable.
	You could even offset this by removing the unused delqry variable.

  Otherwise, looks good to me.

  	Thanks,

		Stephen

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Yoshiyuki AsabaDate: 2008-07-03 02:16:49
Subject: Re: Git Repository for WITH RECURSIVE and others
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-03 00:51:59
Subject: Re: Location for pgstat.stat

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-03 03:38:29
Subject: Re: Patch to change psql default banner v6
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2008-07-02 23:11:01
Subject: WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group