Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
Date: 2008-03-11 20:32:45
Message-ID: 20080311133245.2660c557@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:17:53 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> > > Particularly consider using psql to restore a pg_dump
> > > dump --- are we going to add "SET statement_timeout=0"
> > > to the pg_dump file?
> >
> > I hope not. That should be the user's choice.
>
> Would anyone want to limit the load time for pg_dump? I can hardly
> see why.

I have to agree with Bruce here. You restore a backup because your
hosed something or you are building a dev environment. These are both
boolean results that should end in TRUE :)

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

- --
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL political pundit | Mocker of Dolphins

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH1uxyATb/zqfZUUQRAvyWAKCATrKgRQygjveXSrY0KIptvKYZJQCgg87z
XrXncZ8d2Qyf61Wtc+OtHXg=
=rBaK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-03-11 20:36:21 Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2008-03-11 20:17:53 Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout