Re: pg_restore --multi-thread

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_restore --multi-thread
Date: 2009-02-12 19:15:06
Message-ID: 36e682920902121115m2c26c4fek40e4eac16812f6b5@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>wrote:

> --num-workers or --num-connections would both work.

--num-parallel?

--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Glaesemann 2009-02-12 19:16:39 Re: pg_restore --multi-thread
Previous Message Cédric Villemain 2009-02-12 19:05:25 Re: pg_restore --multi-thread