| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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 ;-)
| 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 |
| 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 |