| From: | Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance |
| Date: | 2008-02-29 21:42:12 |
| Message-ID: | FE5A1CC4-A618-4C37-AEAF-1D636AC3E7B3@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think a sane way to think about what Simon would like to accomplish
> is not "turn psql into a parallel job scheduler"
My $0.02: I often find myself wishing I could perform parallel
operations in psql. There was a proposal for that that came up during
8.3 development; whatever happened to it?
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-02-29 22:30:28 | Re: Read-ahead and parallelism in redo recovery |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-02-29 21:36:17 | Re: "could not open relation 1663/16384/16584: No such file or directory" in a specific combination of transactions with temp tables |