From: | daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout |
Date: | 2008-06-25 00:01:03 |
Message-ID: | 20080625000103.GD12245@sonic.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 05:34:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> writes:
> > lock-timeout sets statement_timeout to a small value while locks are being
> > taken on all the tables. Then it resets it to default. So it could reset it
> > to whatever the new default is.
>
> "reset to default" is *surely* not the right behavior; resetting to the
> setting that had been in effect might be a bit sane. But the whole
> design sounds pretty broken to start with. The timer management code
> already understands the concept of scheduling the interrupt for the
> nearest of a couple of potentially active timeouts. ISTM any patch
> intended to add a feature like this ought to extend that logic rather
> than hack around changing the values of global variables.
Are we talking about the same patch? Because I don't know what you are
refering to with "timer management code" and "scheduling the interrupt" in
the context of pg_dump.
-dg
--
David Gould daveg(at)sonic(dot)net 510 536 1443 510 282 0869
If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2008-06-25 00:17:58 | Re: proposal for smaller indexes on index-ordered tables |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-06-24 22:24:46 | Re: stat() vs cygwin |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-06-25 02:41:07 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-06-24 21:34:50 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout |