On 2020-01-21 10:36, Luis Carril wrote:
>> Yes we can support --include-foreign-data without parallel option and
>> later add support for parallel option as a different patch.
>
> Hi,
>
> I've attached a new version of the patch in which an error is
> emitted if the parallel backup is used with the --include-foreign-data
> option.
This seems like an overreaction. The whole point of
lockTableForWorker() is to avoid deadlocks, but foreign tables don't
have locks, so it's not a problem. I think you can just skip foreign
tables in lockTableForWorker() using the same logic that getTables() uses.
I think parallel data dump would be an especially interesting option
when using foreign tables, so it's worth figuring this out.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
