Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?
Date
Msg-id 5.1.0.14.0.20021024113025.028f3340@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 05:50 PM 23/10/2002 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>Looking at the pg_dump code, it seems the fseeks are optional in there
>anyway because it already has code to read the file sequentially rather

But there are features that are not available if it can't seek: eg. it will 
not restore in a different order to that in which it was written; it will 
not dump data offsets in the TOC so dump files can not be restored in 
alternate orders; restore times will be large for a single table (it has to 
read the entire file potentially).


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                 |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Standalone backend doesn't read postgresql.conf
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem?