Re: statement timeout vs dump/restore

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT" <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: statement timeout vs dump/restore
Date: 2008-05-05 10:38:54
Message-ID: E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579030D41B6@m0143.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> > 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 ?

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Pflug 2008-05-05 11:40:38 Re: Proposed Patch - LDAPS support for servers on port 636 w/o TLS
Previous Message Greg Smith 2008-05-05 05:37:28 Re: Sorting writes during checkpoint