Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2025-03-06 13:47:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... I wonder if we could just rip out pg_upgrade's support
>> for DB-level parallelism, which is not terribly pretty anyway, and
>> simply pass the -j switch straight to pg_dump and pg_restore.
> I don't think that'd work well, right now pg_dump only handles a single
> database (pg_dumpall doesn't yet support -Fc) *and* pg_dump is still serial
> for the bulk of the work that pg_upgrade cares about.
> I think the only parallelism that'd actually happen for pg_upgrade would be
> dumping of large objects?
Uh ... the entire point here is that we'd be trying to parallelize its
dumping of stats, no? Most DBs will have enough of those to be
interesting, I should think.
regards, tom lane
