Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
От | Erik Jones |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 83D8982D-762F-4B8C-9F46-6DC14A72FD13@myemma.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Feb 20, 2008, at 10:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com> writes: >> On Feb 20, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Gregory Stark wrote: >>> I would suggest leaving out the && which only obfuscate what's >>> going on here. >>> >>> PGOPTIONS=... pg_restore ... >>> >>> would work just as well and be clearer about what's going on. > >> Right, that's just an unnecessary habit of mine. > > Isn't that habit outright wrong? ISTM that with the && in there, > what you're doing is equivalent to > > PGOPTIONS=whatever > pg_restore ... > > This syntax will set PGOPTIONS for the remainder of the shell session, > causing it to also affect (say) a subsequent psql invocation. > Which is > exactly not what is wanted. Yes. Erik Jones DBA | Emma® erik@myemma.com 800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888 615.292.0777 (fax) Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style. Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: