Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Date: 2021-10-25 15:38:51
Message-ID: 3996712.1635176331@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 10/25/21 10:23, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Hmmm ... but disk space could
>> become a problem, particularly on older machines with not so much
>> disk. Do we really need to maintain a separate checkout for each
>> branch? It seems like a fresh checkout from the repo would be
>> little more expensive than the current copy-a-checkout process.)

> If you set it up with these settings then the disk space used is minimal:
>      git_use_workdirs => 1,
>      rm_worktrees => 1,

Maybe we should make those the defaults? AFAICS the current
default setup uses circa 200MB per back branch, even between runs.
I'm not sure what that is buying us.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-10-25 15:56:32 Re: when the startup process doesn't (logging startup delays)
Previous Message Mikhail 2021-10-25 15:37:47 Re: [PATCH] Make ENOSPC not fatal in semaphore creation