Re: Parallel pg_dump for 9.1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Parallel pg_dump for 9.1
Date
Msg-id 4BB110F5.6070001@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel pg_dump for 9.1  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
>
> It's completely possible that you could want to clone a server for dev
> and have more CPU and I/O bandwidth available than can be efficiently
> used by a non-parallel pg_dump.  But certainly what Joachim is talking
> about will be a good start.  I think there is merit to the
> synchronized snapshot stuff for pg_dump and perhaps other applications
> as well, but I think Joachim's (well-taken) point is that we don't
> have to treat it as a hard prerequisite.
>
>
>   

Possibly. I think the most useful thing that could be done right now is 
probably the least controversial, namely creating a directory type of 
archive, with support for pg_restore, including parallel pg_restore.

Personally I think that's worth doing in its own right anyway.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Date:
Subject: Re: Alpha release this week?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Alpha release this week?