Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump

This is what Postgres-XC is doing between a coordinator and a
datanode. Coordinator may correspond to poolers/loadbalancers.
Does anyone think it makes sense to extract XC implementation of
snapshot shipping to PostgreSQL itself?

Cheers;
----------
Koichi Suzuki

2010/12/7 Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>:
> On 12/07/2010 01:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>>> However, if you were doing something like parallel pg_dump you could
>>>> just run the parent and child instances all against the slave, so the
>>>> pg_dump scenario doesn't seem to offer much of a supporting use-case for
>>>> worrying about this.  When would you really need to be able to do it?
>>
>>> If you had several standbys, you could distribute the work of the
>>> pg_dump among them.  This would be a huge speedup for a large database,
>>> potentially, thanks to parallelization of I/O and network.  Imagine
>>> doing a pg_dump of a 300GB database in 10min.
>>
>> That does sound kind of attractive.  But to do that I think we'd have to
>> go with the pass-the-snapshot-through-the-client approach.  Shipping
>> internal snapshot files through the WAL stream doesn't seem attractive
>> to me.
>
> this kind of functionality would also be very useful/interesting for
> connection poolers/loadbalancers that are trying to distribute load
> across multiple hosts and could use that to at least give some sort of
> consistency guarantee.
>
>
>
> Stefan
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>