| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance |
| Date: | 2008-02-26 18:02:17 |
| Message-ID: | 5327.1204048937@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> While the pg_dump split train seems to be leaving the station, I feel
> compelled to point out that focus does nothing to help people who are
> bulk-loading data that came from somewhere else.
What are you imagining here ... a plain SQL script containing
database-independent INSERT commands? That's going to suck compared
to COPY no matter what.
If you're imagining that it's at least pg_dump output that came from
someplace else, we can probably speed it up using the ideas being
kicked around here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-02-26 18:13:21 | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-26 17:54:14 | Idle idea for improving concurrency of LISTEN/NOTIFY |