Re: Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> What is the feedback on this patch? Is there anything I need to do to
> get it into the next commit fest?

Yes, go add it to the wiki page ;-):
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFest:May

I agree that we should do that, but the thread on -hackers ("Autovacuum 
vs statement_timeout") wasn't totally conclusive. Greg Sabine Mullane 
and Peter Eisentraut argued that we shouldn't, but neither provided a 
plausible use case where a statement_timeout on restoring a dump would 
be useful. I'm thinking we should apply the patch unless someone comes 
up with one.

To quote Tom:
> I think we need to be careful to distinguish three situations:
> 
> * statement_timeout during pg_dump
> * statement_timeout during pg_restore
> * statement_timeout during psql reading a pg_dump script file

This patch addresses the third situation, but leaves open the 1st and 
the 2nd. IMO, we should set statement_timeout = 0 in them as well, 
unless someone comes up with plausible use case for using a non-zero 
statement_timeout.

Ps. If you want to save the committer a couple of minutes of valuable 
time, you can fix the indentation to use tabs instead of spaces, and 
remove the spurious whitespace change on the empty line.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com