From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: statement timeout vs dump/restore |
Date: | 2008-05-05 13:01:25 |
Message-ID: | 481F0525.2060702@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT wrote:
>>> Do we want the following:
>>>
>>> 1. pg_dump issues "set statement_timeout = 0;" to the
>>>
>> database prior to
>>
>>> taking its copy of data (yes/no/default-but-switchable)
>>> 2. pg_dump/pg_restore issue "set statement_timeout = 0;" in
>>>
>> text mode
>>
>>> output (yes/no/default-but-switchable)
>>> 3. pg_restore issues "set statement_timeout = 0;" to the
>>>
>> database in
>>
>>> restore mode (yes/no/default-but-switchable)
>>>
>> I think "yes" for all three. There was some handwaving about someone
>> maybe not wanting it, but an utter lack of convincing use-cases; so
>> I see no point in going to the effort of providing a switch.
>>
>> Note that 2 and 3 are actually the same thing (if you think they are
>> not, then you are putting the behavior in the wrong place).
>>
>
> I thought a proper fix for 3 would not depend on 2 ?
>
>
>
I'm sure we could separate the two if we wanted to. Since we don't it's
been put in the most natural spot, which does both.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Boreham | 2008-05-05 13:36:13 | Re: Proposed Patch - LDAPS support for servers on port 636 w/o TLS |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-05-05 11:51:25 | Re: Proposed Patch - LDAPS support for servers on port 636 w/o TLS |