Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46264930.3070307@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: >> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 20:54, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> I'm not excited about the other ones but I can see the argument for >>> making pg_dump force the timeout to 0. >> Allowing pg_dump to run un-checked could also lead to problems such as >> exceeding maintenence windows causing performance issues, or causing trouble >> due to lock contention with ongoing pg_dumps. If you have that problem, you need bigger hardware. pg_dump is a priority application. Not to mention, if you *really* want that time of behavior it is easy enough to wrap pg_dump in perl or python. Let the foot guns be available to those that can script them :) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: