Re: pg_dump lock timeout

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, hari(at)efrontier(dot)com
Subject: Re: pg_dump lock timeout
Date: 2008-07-20 18:50:50
Message-ID: 13580.1216579850@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> writes:
> Here is an updated version of this patch against head. It builds, runs and
> functions as expected. I did not build the sgml.

Applied with mostly minor cosmetic improvements --- the only actual
error I noticed was failing to check whether the server version supports
statement_timeout.

In most cases our policy has been that pg_dumpall should accept and pass
through any pg_dump option for which it's sensible to do so. I did not
make that happen but it seems it'd be a reasonable follow-on patch.

A minor point is that the syntax "-X lock-wait-timeout=n" or
"-X lock-wait-timeout n" won't work, although perhaps people used to
-X might expect it to. Since we deprecate -X (and don't even document
it anymore), I thought that making this work would be much more trouble
than it's worth, but perhaps that's open to argument.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-07-20 19:05:27 Re: CommitFest dragging?
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2008-07-20 17:22:22 Re: CommitFest dragging?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2008-07-20 21:43:35 Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-07-20 16:22:30 Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECUSIVE patches 0717