Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Chris" <dmagick(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Date: 2008-02-21 05:30:14
Message-ID: 87mypuvpuh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
"Chris" <dmagick(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

>> When I said "obfuscating" I meant it. I'm pretty familiar with sh scripting
>> and I'm not even sure what the && behaviour would do.
>
> It chains commands together so if the first fails the second doesn't happen.

I meant in this case, not in general. That is, does it introduce a subshell?

Sh traditionally has to introduce to implement some of the logical control and
pipe operators. I'm not sure if a simple && is enough but often it's
surprising how quickly that happens.

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Markus BertheauDate: 2008-02-21 07:04:01
Subject: planner favors seq scan too early
Previous:From: ChrisDate: 2008-02-21 05:29:37
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group