| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_restore dependencies |
| Date: | 2009-04-10 20:22:40 |
| Message-ID: | 49DFAA90.5080504@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom, Andrew,
>> Well, we certainly want to be able to run CREATE INDEXes in parallel,
>> so this would appear to require hard-wiring some conception of shared
>> versus exclusive lock into pg_restore. I think it might be a bit late
>> to consider that for 8.4.
>
>
> I'm pretty sure I had the logic for this correct stuff originally, so
> I'm going to go back and check that.
FWIW, I've tested 3 moderately complex databases with this, and the
locking issue happens on every one. As a result, getting more than 3
cores of scalability on any fairly complex DB isn't possible without
fixing this.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-04-10 20:23:52 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4027: backslash escapingnotdisabled inplpgsql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-10 20:07:17 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4027: backslash escapingnotdisabled inplpgsql |