| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas |
| Date: | 2012-05-31 00:20:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20120531.092043.1953698679173443322.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
>> Yeah, Jeff's experiments indicated that the remaining bottleneck is lock
>> management in the server. What I fixed so far on the pg_dump side
>> should be enough to let partial dumps run at reasonable speed even if
>> the whole database contains many tables. But if psql is taking
>> AccessShareLock on lots of tables, there's still a problem.
>
> Ok, I modified the part of pg_dump where tremendous number of LOCK
> TABLE are issued. I replace them with single LOCK TABLE with multiple
> tables. With 100k tables LOCK statements took 13 minutes in total, now
> it only takes 3 seconds. Comments?
Shall I commit to master and all supported branches?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sergey Koposov | 2012-05-31 00:26:27 | Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-05-31 00:03:00 | Re: Figuring out shared buffer pressure |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-31 03:54:30 | Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas |
| Previous Message | Murat Tasan | 2012-05-30 20:30:33 | Re: does the query planner consider work_mem? |