From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | Shoaib Mir <shoaibmir(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Terry Lee Tucker <terry(at)chosen-ones(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Locking Down a Database |
Date: | 2010-07-15 14:42:18 |
Message-ID: | 4C3F1E4A.30603@lelarge.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Le 15/07/2010 16:21, Shoaib Mir a écrit :
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Terry Lee Tucker
> <terry(at)chosen-ones(dot)org <mailto:terry(at)chosen-ones(dot)org>> wrote:
>
> Greetings:
>
> I occasionally find the need to perform some maintenance on one or
> more of
> thirteen different databases. Typically, due to the interaction
> between the
> databases, I need to lock down the databases for a short period of
> time so
> that no updates are being performed anywhere.
>
>
> There is something that I saw the other day in PG 9.0 i.e.
> transaction_read_only which might be helpful in your case.
transaction_read_only is not something you can set. It's set by the
server, to "on" on a hotstandby server, and else to "off". And
default_transaction_read_only can be "unset", so not that useful too.
--
Guillaume
http://www.postgresql.fr
http://dalibo.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anthony Presley | 2010-07-15 16:16:45 | Re: Idle In Transaction |
Previous Message | Artur Dabrowski | 2010-07-15 14:28:56 | Re: Incorrect FTS results with GIN index |