From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: parallel pg_restore - WIP patch |
Date: | 2008-09-30 12:55:47 |
Message-ID: | 48E221D3.2040701@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Philip Warner wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, it quite possibly would. You would not be able to build
>> two indexes on the same table in parallel, even though they wouldn't
>> have conflicting locks.
>>
> I suppose so, but:
>
> 1. By the same logic it might speed things up; it might build two
> completely separate indexes and thereby avoid (some kind of) contention.
> In any case, it would most likely do *something* else. It should only
> reduce performance if (a) it can do nothing or (b) there is a benefit in
> building multiple indexes on the same table at the same time.
>
> 2. Perhaps if there are a limited number of items that share
> dependencies but which are known to be OK (ie. indexes), maybe list them
> in the inner loop as exceptions and allow them to run parallel. This
> would mean a failure to list a new TOC item type would result in worse
> performance rather than a crash.
>
>
>
I will look at it in due course. Right now my concern is simply to get
something that works that we can do some testing with. I think that's
what we have now (fingers crossed). Some parts of it are jury rigged.
BTW, though, building indexes for the same table together is likely to
be a win AIUI, especially given the recent work on synchronised scans.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2008-09-30 12:59:08 | Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends |
Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2008-09-30 12:49:26 | Re: FSM rewrite committed, loose ends |