From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Disabling function validation |
Date: | 2003-10-07 16:39:43 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0310071838130.21517-100000@peter.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I think we should change the "check_function_bodies" to something more
> general. I like "restore_validation_mode" because it could also be used
> to disable foreign key checks which we are discussing. An even more
> general idea would be to have something like "restore_mode", and perhaps
> could handle cases like allowing a larger sort_mem or other
> optimizations during restore.
I also like this approach (independent of whether foreign keys should be
one of its applications). It gives us more freedom to open and close
these types of holes when new issues arise or pg_dump improves.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-07 16:58:24 | Re: Disabling function validation |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut - PostgreSQL | 2003-10-07 08:07:56 | pgsql-server/src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib da ... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2003-10-07 16:57:20 | BigInt woes |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-07 15:58:26 | Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3 |