| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Allowing multiple concurrent base backups |
| Date: | 2011-01-12 15:17:38 |
| Message-ID: | 4D2DC612.9040302@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12.01.2011 17:15, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:26:05AM +0100, marcin mank wrote:
>> Considering that parallell base backups would be io-bound (or
>> network-bound), there is little need to actually run them in parallell
>
> That's not actually true. Backups at the moment are CPU-bound, and
> running them in parallel is one way to make them closer to I/O-bound,
> which is what they *should* be.
That's a different kind of "parallel". We're talking about taking
multiple backups in parallel, each using one process, and you're talking
about taking one backup using multiple parallel processes or threads.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2011-01-12 15:21:08 | Re: Allowing multiple concurrent base backups |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-12 15:15:57 | Re: pg_depend explained |