Re: pg_dump additional options for performance

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Date: 2008-07-21 01:18:29
Message-ID: 20080721011829.GC18846@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

* Simon Riggs (simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 17:43 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Even this doesn't cover everything though- it's too focused on tables
> > and data loading. Where do functions go? What about types?
>
> Yes, it is focused on tables and data loading. What about
> functions/types? No relevance here.

I don't see how they're not relevant, it's not like they're being
excluded and in fact they show up in the pre-load output. Heck, even if
they *were* excluded, that should be made clear in the documentation
(either be an explicit include list, or saying they're excluded).

Part of what's driving this is making sure we have a plan for future
objects and where they'll go. Perhaps it would be enough to just say
"pre-load is everything in the schema, except things which are faster
done in bulk (eg: indexes, keys)". I don't think it's right to say
pre-load is "only object definitions required to load data" when it
includes functions and ACLs though.

Hopefully my suggestion and these comments will get us to a happy
middle-ground.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message laser 2008-07-21 01:39:54 Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?
Previous Message Radek Strnad 2008-07-21 01:15:56 Re: [WIP] collation support revisited (phase 1)

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message daveg 2008-07-21 01:49:42 Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2008-07-21 01:13:58 Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECUSIVE patches 0717