Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
Date
Msg-id 18235.1176857652@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
Responses Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> I'm with Joshua on this one. Statement_timeout is often used as a means for 
> protection from long running statements due to server load and locking and 
> all of the above commands can certainly fall into that area. If people feel 
> strongly that the command line programs need a way to circumvent it, add 
> a --ignore-statement-timeout option or similar mechanism. 

The worst-case scenario here is that your server fails and you discover
that all your backups are corrupt because you didn't notice pg_dump was
failing due to statement_timeout.  (Maybe it just recently started to
fail because your biggest table grew past the point at which the COPY
command exceeded statement_timeout.)

I'm not excited about the other ones but I can see the argument for
making pg_dump force the timeout to 0.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update error message for COPY with a multi-byte delimiter.