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

Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Klemme <shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Date: 2012-05-31 14:22:08
Message-ID: CAGTBQpaW5O7vUKMrWGn+xUJR-Ni-FEQB_DUZMB_Gt_a-uMp8WA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> OK, my fault was to assume you wanted to measure only your part, while
> apparently you meant overall savings.  But Tom had asked for separate
> measurements if I understood him correctly.  Also, that measurement of
> your change would go after the O(N^2) fix.  It could actually turn out
> to be much more than 9% because the overall time would be reduced even
> more dramatic.  So it might actually be good for your fix to wait a
> bit. ;-)

It's not clear whether Tom is already working on that O(N^2) fix in locking.

I'm asking because it doesn't seem like a complicated patch,
contributors may want to get working if not ;-)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-05-31 14:31:16
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous:From: Robert KlemmeDate: 2012-05-31 14:17:11
Subject: Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-05-31 14:31:16
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-05-31 14:21:06
Subject: Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile

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