| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Date: | 2010-12-02 18:10:45 |
| Message-ID: | 4CF7E125.7050007@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/02/2010 12:56 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/02/2010 05:50 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>> So the use case of parralel dump in a bunch or user given locations
>> would be to use different mount points (disk subsystems) at the same
>> time. Not sure how releveant it is.
>
> I think it will complicate this feature unnecessarily for 9.1.
> Personally, I need this patch so much I'm thinking of backporting it.
> However, having all the data go to one directory/mount wouldn't
> trouble me at all.
>
> Now, if only I could think of some way to write a parallel dump to a
> set of pipes, I'd be in heaven.
The only way I can see that working sanely would be to have a program
gathering stuff at the other end of the pipes, and ensuring it was all
coherent. That would be a huge growth in scope for this, and I seriously
doubt it's worth it.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-12-02 18:18:45 | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-12-02 17:59:23 | Re: Proposal: First step towards Intelligent, integrateddatabase |