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

Re: Testing of parallel restore with current snapshot

From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Testing of parallel restore with current snapshot
Date: 2010-02-27 06:52:26
Message-ID: 9362e74e1002262252l56ab8e1cg44079c7f4384dd91@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom,
    I just took the patch, but it seems to be in binary format. Can you send
me the patch to me?

Thanks,
Gokul.

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom,
> >> Is anyone interested enough to try it if I code it?
>
> > If you're patient for results, sure.  I seem to be doing a customer
> > migration or upgrade every week now, so it wouldn't take me long to have
> > a test subject with a fairly complex database.
>
> Here's a draft patch that does ordering using two lists, as I proposed.
> Please test to see if it's any faster or slower than the original logic.
>
> Note: since this changes struct TocEntry, be sure to recompile all files
> in src/bin/pg_dump/ after patching.
>
>                        regards, tom lane
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-02-27 06:53:24
Subject: Re: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration
Previous:From: Gokulakannan SomasundaramDate: 2010-02-27 06:43:49
Subject: Re: Lock Wait Statistics (next commitfest)

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