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: 47C413EB.8080505@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
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.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

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 © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group