On 03/28/2012 02:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 28 14:46:30 -0300 2012:
>>> I keep hoping someone who knows Windows is going to take a look at
>>> this, but so far no luck. It could also really use some attention
>>> from someone who has an actual really big database handy, to see how
>>> successful it is in reducing the dump time. Without those things, I
>>> can't see this getting committed. But in the meantime, a few fairly
>>> minor comments based on reading the code.
>> My main comment about the current patch is that it looks like it's
>> touching pg_restore parallel code by moving some stuff into parallel.c.
>> If that's really the case and its voluminous, maybe this patch would
>> shrink a bit if we could do the code moving in a first patch. That
>> would be mostly mechanical. Then the interesting stuff would apply on
>> top of that. That would make review easier.
> +1.
+1 also.
FYI I am just starting some test runs on Windows. I also have a
reasonably sized db (98 gb) on my SL6 server which should be perfect for
testing this (I just partitioned its two main tables), and will try to
get some timing runs.
cheers
andrew
