Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Date
Msg-id 4050293.1635182059@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2021-10-25 10:23:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It seems like a fresh checkout from the repo would be little more expensive
>> than the current copy-a-checkout process.)

> I haven't looked in detail, but from what I've seen in the logs the
> is-there-anything-new check is already not cheap, and does a checkout / update
> of the git directory.

Yeah, you probably need a checkout to apply the rule about don't rebuild
after documentation-only changes.  But it seems like the case where the
branch tip hasn't moved at all could be optimized fairly easily.  I'm not
sure it's worth the trouble to add code for that given our current usage
of the buildfarm; but if we were to start tracking branches that only
change a couple of times a year, it would be.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove unused wait events.
Next
From: "Bossart, Nathan"
Date:
Subject: Re: parallelizing the archiver