Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_dump additional options for performance

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Date: 2008-02-26 13:28:11
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:
> Separate files seems much simpler...

Yes, We need to stick to the KISS principle.

ISTM that we could simply invent a new archive format of "d" for directory.

BTW, parallel dumping might be important, but is really much less so 
than parallel restoring in my book.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-02-26 13:35:15
Subject: Re: Reference by in \d <table_name> out
Previous:From: mac_man2005Date: 2008-02-26 13:15:00
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 2WRS [WIP]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group