| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 04:53:32 |
| Message-ID: | 402DA9CC.1010700@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>> 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...
Oracle does for sure, but I can tell you that I have seen people bitten
by triggers inadvertantly left disabled before...I think Tom has a good
point.
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2004-02-14 10:50:58 | Re: pg_restore problems and suggested resolution |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-02-14 04:16:28 | Re: pg_restore problems and suggested resolution |