From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: daveg <daveg@sonic.net>
Subject: Re: pg_dump lock timeout
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 21:33:46 -0400
Message-ID: <20080703013346.GP31154@tamriel.snowman.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080511113047.GV5673@sonic.net>
References: <63c05a820807021441o4658171cm91d4984f3981ecef@mail.gmail.com>
<937d27e10807021450m4df0c366t870d6678a1abf61f@mail.gmail.com>
Dave,
Just a few comments regarding your pg_dump lock timeout patch (in
general I like the concept and agree with adding it):
- No validity checking that the argument passed in has anything to do
with a number. The backend will do this, but it strikes me as a bit
odd to not do any checking at argument processing time.
- You call the argument 'wait time' in the documentation, but 'DELAY'
in the command-line help. I'd recommend using one term and sticking
to it. You're already two lines in the command-line help, you can
spell it out as 'WAIT_TIME' or similar.
- getTables() uses different variables for each query, and I'm
inclined to agree with that approach to make following the code
easier. I'd encourage you to add a new variable for the
statement_timeout query rather than reusing the lockqry variable.
You could even offset this by removing the unused delqry variable.
Otherwise, looks good to me.
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 188B) download
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Cc: sfrost@snowman.net, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, daveg@sonic.net
Subject: Re: pg_dump lock timeout
In-Reply-To: <20080703013346.GP31154@tamriel.snowman.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox