Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Klemme <shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Date: 2012-05-31 14:22:08
Message-ID: CAGTBQpaW5O7vUKMrWGn+xUJR-Ni-FEQB_DUZMB_Gt_a-uMp8WA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> OK, my fault was to assume you wanted to measure only your part, while
> apparently you meant overall savings.  But Tom had asked for separate
> measurements if I understood him correctly.  Also, that measurement of
> your change would go after the O(N^2) fix.  It could actually turn out
> to be much more than 9% because the overall time would be reduced even
> more dramatic.  So it might actually be good for your fix to wait a
> bit. ;-)

It's not clear whether Tom is already working on that O(N^2) fix in locking.

I'm asking because it doesn't seem like a complicated patch,
contributors may want to get working if not ;-)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-05-31 14:31:16 Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-05-31 14:21:06 Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-05-31 14:31:16 Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous Message Robert Klemme 2012-05-31 14:17:11 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas