On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:41:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Are we talking about the same patch?
>
> Maybe not --- I thought you were talking about a backend-side behavioral
> change.
>
> > Because I don't know what you are
> > refering to with "timer managem
daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are we talking about the same patch?
Maybe not --- I thought you were talking about a backend-side behavioral
change.
> Because I don't know what you are
> refering to with "timer management code" and "scheduling the interrupt" in
> the context of pg_dump.
I'm
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 05:34:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
>
> "rese
daveg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
set
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:30:53PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> daveg wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout
> >> flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during
> >> pg_dump/pg_restore? I
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout
flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during
pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to disable it
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout
> > flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during
> > pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to get do this without adding a new --use-statement-timeout
> flag. Is anyone going to want to honor statement_timeout during
> pg_dump/pg_restore? I thought we were just going to disable it.
I believe so.
daveg wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?:
> > > >
> > > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like:
> > > > >
>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:28PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Joshua D. Drake escribi?:
> > >
> > > > That is an interesting idea. Something like:
> > > >
> > > > pg_restore -E "SET ST
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Joshua D. Drake escribi?:
> >
> > > That is an interesting idea. Something like:
> > >
> > > pg_restore -E "SET STATEMENT_TIMEOUT=0; SET MAINTENANCE_WORK_MEM=1G" ?
> >
> > We already have it -
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake escribió:
>
> > That is an interesting idea. Something like:
> >
> > pg_restore -E "SET STATEMENT_TIMEOUT=0; SET MAINTENANCE_WORK_MEM=1G" ?
>
> We already have it -- it's called PGOPTIONS.
>
Ok but is n
13 matches
Mail list logo