Re: Large files for relations

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, Jim Mlodgenski <jimmy76(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Large files for relations
Date: 2024-03-06 21:54:46
Message-ID: CA+hUKGJ0mkNhXp0OvGf=wQPYYhtVB7rQOrAwftZV2ittTHpQGw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rebased. I had intended to try to get this into v17, but a couple of
unresolved problems came up while rebasing over the new incremental
backup stuff. You snooze, you lose. Hopefully we can sort these out
in time for the next commitfest:

* should pg_combinebasebackup read the control file to fetch the segment size?
* hunt for other segment-size related problems that may be lurking in
new incremental backup stuff
* basebackup_incremental.c wants to use memory in proportion to
segment size, which looks like a problem, and I wrote about that in a
new thread[1]

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA%2BhUKG%2B2hZ0sBztPW4mkLfng0qfkNtAHFUfxOMLizJ0BPmi5%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-Allow-relation-segment-size-to-be-set-by-initdb.patch application/x-patch 51.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2024-03-06 22:22:51 Re: vacuumdb/clusterdb/reindexdb: allow specifying objects to process in all databases
Previous Message Matthias van de Meent 2024-03-06 21:51:18 Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan