Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I received a private email report yesterday from someone using
> pg_upgrade with PG 9.0 who found it took five hours for pg_upgrade to
> upgrade a database with 150k tables. Yes, that is a lot of tables, but
> pg_upgrade should be able to do better than that.
>
> I have modified pg_upgrade in git master to cache scandir() and reduce
> array lookups and the time is down to 38 minutes. (He prototyped a hash
> implementation that was 30 minutes but it was too much code for my
> taste.)
>
> I don't think this is reasonable to backpatch. If anyone else sees
> cases for pg_upgrade improvement, please let me know.
One more question --- should I be sending pg_upgrade patches to the list
for approval? The restructuring patch was large and didn't seem
necessary to post, and the speedups were tested by the bug reporter, so
I figured those were OK to apply.
Oh, and do we want to move pg_upgrade into /bin for 9.1? There was
discussion about that six months ago.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
