| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | pg_upgrade performance with 150k tables |
| Date: | 2010-10-20 18:33:05 |
| Message-ID: | 201010201833.o9KIX6b00618@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I received a private email report yesterday from someone using
pg_upgrade with PG 9.0 who found it took five hours for pg_upgrade to
upgrade a database with 150k tables. Yes, that is a lot of tables, but
pg_upgrade should be able to do better than that.
I have modified pg_upgrade in git master to cache scandir() and reduce
array lookups and the time is down to 38 minutes. (He prototyped a hash
implementation that was 30 minutes but it was too much code for my
taste.)
I don't think this is reasonable to backpatch. If anyone else sees
cases for pg_upgrade improvement, please let me know.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-10-20 19:01:37 | pg_upgrade patch application process, and move to /bin? |
| Previous Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2010-10-20 17:34:59 | Re: pg_rawdump |