Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
Date
Msg-id 20080226162401.1a6f70a1@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:03:57 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> So you have four serialization points not just one; at each one the
> slowest subtask forces everyone else to wait, even if there's work
> that could potentially be done on other tables.  This is fine for a
> quick-and-dirty proof of concept but it's certainly not how we'd want
> to implement the real thing.  But I doubt you can get much further
> without putting some actual dependency awareness into it.

Exactly. I have gone as far as I actually can without quite a bit of
brain trauma and hand holding. I could probably prototype it in perl
fairly easy but C is a complete no go for me.

I hope the numbers were at least helpful.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> 
>             regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the
> PostgreSQL project by donating at
> 
>                 http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
> 


- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHxK2jATb/zqfZUUQRArgSAJ9z6f4dJLZ1FSbU6ISpIKXaIePzJQCePRY9
8PUIRudPtAlEBH1ivDMJOC4=
=afNY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Required make version