Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Florian G. Pflug wrote:
>>> Would it be possible to determine when the copy is starting that
>>> this case holds, and not use the parallel parsing idea in those cases?
>> In theory, yes. In pratice, I don't want to be the one who has to
>> answer to an angry user who just suffered a major drop in COPY
>> performance after adding an ENUM column to his table.
> I am yet to be convinced that this is even theoretically a good path
> to follow. Any sufficiently large table could probably be partitioned
> and then we could use the parallelism that is being discussed for
> pg_restore without any modification to the backend at all. Similar
> tricks could be played by an external bulk loader for third party data
I was just floating this as an idea- I don't know enough about the
backend to know if it was a good idea or not, it sounds like "not".
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2008-02-27 16:56:24|
|Subject: ResourceOwners for Snapshots? holdable portals|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2008-02-27 16:46:08|
|Subject: Re: An idea for parallelizing COPY within one backend|