Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Asif Rehman <asifr(dot)rehman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kashif Zeeshan <kashif(dot)zeeshan(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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>
Subject: Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
Date: 2020-04-21 04:27:31
Message-ID: CAA4eK1LiDYB6ak0g5vbyjxZhNf1RvoCY5Ckg7bWEFkwytZuD6w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:07 PM Asif Rehman <asifr(dot)rehman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> I forgot to make a check for no-manifest. Fixed. Attached is the updated
> patch.
>
>
Have we done any performance testing with this patch to see the benefits?
If so, can you point me to the results? If not, then can we perform some
tests on large backups to see the benefits of this patch/idea?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-04-21 04:42:40 Bogus documentation for bogus geometric operators
Previous Message Amit Khandekar 2020-04-21 04:25:10 Re: spin_delay() for ARM