|From:||Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>|
|Subject:||Re: pg_dump lock timeout|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
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.
|Next Message||Yoshiyuki Asaba||2008-07-03 02:16:49||Re: Git Repository for WITH RECURSIVE and others|
|Previous Message||Tom Lane||2008-07-03 00:51:59||Re: Location for pgstat.stat|
|Next Message||Tom Lane||2008-07-03 03:38:29||Re: Patch to change psql default banner v6|
|Previous Message||David Fetter||2008-07-02 23:11:01||WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP|