Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Date
Msg-id 20121109003340.GA26605@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov  8, 2012 at 03:46:09PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > As a followup to Magnus's report that pg_upgrade was slow for many
> > tables, I did some more testing with many tables, e.g.:
> >
> ...
> >
> > Any ideas?  I am attaching my test script.
> 
> Have you reviewed the thread at:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2012-09/msg00003.php
> ?
> 
> There is a known N^2 behavior when using pg_dump against pre-9.3 servers.

I am actually now dumping git head/9.3, so I assume all the problems we
know about should be fixed.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: AutoVacuum starvation from sinval messages
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Enabling Checksums