Re: Parallel pg_restore versus old dump files

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Uh, that doesn't fix anything: if you can't seek, a TOC at the end of
> the file is useless.  And the cases where the writer can't seek are
> likely to be identically the ones where the reader can't seek, viz
> pg_dump piped to pg_restore (perhaps with some other programs between).

That seems like a tenuous leap. A typical reason for the pipe is to
transfer it to a different machine and that only has to be done once.

But I'm not convinced it's such a great idea either for the reason I
described -- It makes the case where pg_restore has to read through
the whole archive that much harder to explain to users. So I'm not
really going to argue for it too strongly. It's also a fair amount of
extra complexity for not much gain. We would still need the fallback
code anyways.

--
greg