On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 04:46:48PM +0200, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> People have been talking about a parallel version of pg_dump a few
> times already. I have been working on some proof-of-concept code for
> this feature every now and then and I am planning to contribute this
> for 9.1.
> There are two main issues with a parallel version of pg_dump:
> The first one is that it requires a consistent snapshot among
> multiple pg_dump clients
Cloning snapshots seems like the way to fix this. I don't know how
far this project has drifted from the PostgreSQL code, but you might
want to look here:
> and the second is that currently the output goes to a single file
> and it is unclear what to do about multiple processes writing into a
> single file.
I don't think that's a good idea. Coming up with a directory
structure for the new parallel pg_dump seems like a much better idea.
Andrew, do you have some notes on this?
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-03-29 15:20:21|
|Subject: Re: enable_joinremoval|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-03-29 15:01:40|
|Subject: Re: enable_joinremoval |