From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable |
Date: | 2008-01-31 13:42:12 |
Message-ID: | 200801311342.m0VDgCN16707@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > OK, but keep in mind if we use synchronized_seqscans in pg_dump we will
> > have to recognize that GUC forever.
>
> No, because it's being used on the query side, not in the emitted dump.
> We have *never* promised that pg_dump version N could dump from server
> version N+1 .., in fact, personally I'd like to make that case be a hard
> error, rather than something people could override with -i.
Oh, yea, interesting, it is part of the connection. That will help.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-01-31 14:20:54 | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2008-01-31 13:36:15 | Re: Will PostgreSQL get ported to CUDA? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-01-31 14:20:54 | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-01-31 12:31:45 | Re: [PATCHES] Better default_statistics_target |