Re: parallel restore vs. windows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: parallel restore vs. windows
Date
Msg-id 493F0B2E.6070204@rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel restore vs. windows  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: parallel restore vs. windows  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> I think pretty much everybody except Philip Warner has found the stuff
> around the TOC data structure and the "archiver" API to be confusing.
> I'm not immediately sure about a better design though, at least not if
> you don't want to duplicate a lot of code between the plain pg_dump and
> the pg_dump/pg_restore cases.
>   

Here was I thinking it was more or less self-documenting and clear ;-).
But, yes, it is complex, and I can still see no way to reduce the
complexity. I should have some old notes on the code and am happy to
expand them  as much as necessary.

If people want to nominate key areas of confusion, I will concentrate on
those first.

In terms of the current discussion, I am not sure I can help greatly;
writing cross-platform thread code is non-trivial. One minor point: I
noticed in early versions of the code that a global AH had been created
-- it occurs to me that this could be problem.





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Chernow
Date:
Subject: Re: parallel restore vs. windows
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: parallel restore vs. windows