Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects

From: Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani(at)google(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects
Date: 2025-07-11 15:47:00
Message-ID: CAH5HC96=3NjeYA5vuj8CyMmiFhU27jgvQ9WgXbUDccrE7xvwYw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 8:21 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Also just would like to confirm that the pg_dump_sort change will go in a
> > different patch.
>
> That's already been committed: http://postgr.es/c/fb6c860.
>

That's great. Thank you.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bernd Helmle 2025-07-11 15:53:58 Re: Changing the state of data checksums in a running cluster
Previous Message Rahila Syed 2025-07-11 15:31:12 Re: Enhancing Memory Context Statistics Reporting