Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Asif Rehman <asifr(dot)rehman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Hamid Akhtar <hamid(dot)akhtar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Suraj Kharage <suraj(dot)kharage(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ahsan Hadi <ahsan(dot)hadi(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, Kashif Zeeshan <kashif(dot)zeeshan(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
Date: 2020-07-06 12:24:03
Message-ID: C94E3DF8-33E2-4295-8780-A52D65374B1A@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 12 Jun 2020, at 19:28, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> I am sure that nobody is arguing that the patch has to be beneficial
> in all cases in order to justify applying it. However, there are
> several good arguments against proceding with this patch:

This thread has stalled with no resolution to the raised issues, and the latest
version of the patch (v15) posted no longer applies (I only tried 0001 which
failed, the green tick in the CFBot is due it mistakenlt thinking an attached
report is a patch). I'm marking this patch Returned with Feedback. Please
open a new CF entry when there is a new version of the patch.

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bharath Rupireddy 2020-07-06 12:29:02 Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit
Previous Message Greg Nancarrow 2020-07-06 12:19:52 Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority