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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
Date
Msg-id 28168.1291656490@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Yeah. I'm still not convinced that using shared memory is a bad way to 
> pass these around. Surely we're not talking about large numbers of them. 
> What am I missing here?

They're not of a very predictable size.

Robert's idea of publish() returning a temp file identifier, which then
gets removed at transaction end, might work all right.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: FK's to refer to rows in inheritance child
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump