Re: patch for parallel pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
Date
Msg-id 201203131504.35047.andres@anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: patch for parallel pg_dump  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 02:48:11 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> (I'm also unconvinced that sorting by relation size is a good idea
> anyway.  Anything that makes the dump order less predictable gets
> push-back, IME.)
Why? Especially in the directory format - which is a prerequisite for parallel 
dump if I remember this correctly - I don't really see a negative point in a 
slightly changing dump order. Given its not deterministic anyway.

Andres


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
Next
From: Joel Jacobson
Date:
Subject: Explicitly specifying use of IN/OUT variable in PL/pgSQL functions