| From: | Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel pg_restore |
| Date: | 2008-09-23 19:43:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20080923124320.27d27b07@jd-laptop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:14:33 +0200
"Stephen R. van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>There are in fact very few letters available, as we've been fairly
> >>profligate in our use of option letters in the pg_dump suite.
>
> >>j and m happen to be two of those that are available.
>
> >--max-workers
>
> Perhaps, but please do not use that as justification for using -m.
> That would be equally silly as abbreviating "number of workers" to -n.
Actually I came up with it because it coincides with existing
terminology. Autovacuum has the concept of max_workers.
Joshua D. Drake
--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua Drake | 2008-09-23 19:43:51 | Re: parallel pg_restore |
| Previous Message | Ron Mayer | 2008-09-23 19:10:55 | Re: PostgreSQL future ideas |