Re: parallel pg_restore - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: parallel pg_restore
Date
Msg-id 1222155859.4445.296.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel pg_restore  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: parallel pg_restore  (Joshua Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:05 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> j and m happen to be two of those that are available.
> 
> I honestly don't have a terribly strong opinion about what it should be 
> called. I can live with jobs or multi-threads.

Perhaps we can use -j for jobs and -m for memory, so we can set memory
available across all threads with a single total value.

I can live with jobs or multi-threads also, whichever we decide. Neither
one is confusing to explain.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Stephen R. van den Berg"
Date:
Subject: Re: parallel pg_restore
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: macport for libpqxx