Re: pg_restore problems and suggested resolution

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joseph Tate <jtate(at)dragonstrider(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_restore problems and suggested resolution
Date: 2004-02-14 04:16:28
Message-ID: 402DA11C.4080800@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> As an implementation issue, I wonder why these things are hacking
> permanent on-disk data structures anyway, when what is wanted is only a
> temporary suspension of triggers/rules within a single backend. Some
> kind of superuser-only SET variable might be a better idea. It'd not be
> hard to implement, and it'd be much safer to use since failures wouldn't
> leave you with bogus catalog contents.

I believe oracle and mssql have ALTER TABLE/DISABLE TRIGGER style
statements...

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2004-02-14 04:53:32 Re: pg_restore problems and suggested resolution
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2004-02-14 01:39:28 Re: Transaction aborts on syntax error.