Re: Single-Transaction Utility options
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Single-Transaction Utility options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1134941301.2964.199.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Single-Transaction Utility options (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 14:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 20:03 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> I meant to ask, why is this not the default or only behavior? > > > Historically, it didn't work that way, so I hadn't thought to change > > that behaviour. We could I suppose... but I'm happy with just an option > > to do --single-transaction. > > I believe Peter's question was rhetorical: what he meant to point out > is that the documentation needs to explain what is the reason for having > this switch, ie, in what cases would you use it or not use it? > Just saying what it does isn't really adequate docs. Well, you know the reason: to allow pg_restore and psql take advantage of the COPY optimization I'm just about to submit. When that patch is accepted, I'll update these docs to explain that. But the two patches are separable, since the -1 still has value anyway. Best Regards, Simon Riggs
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: