Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Date
Msg-id 87mypuvpuh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?  (Chris <dmagick@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
List pgsql-performance
"Chris" <dmagick@gmail.com> writes:

>> When I said "obfuscating" I meant it. I'm pretty familiar with sh scripting
>> and I'm not even sure what the && behaviour would do.
>
> It chains commands together so if the first fails the second doesn't happen.

I meant in this case, not in general. That is, does it introduce a subshell?

Sh traditionally has to introduce to implement some of the logical control and
pipe operators. I'm not sure if a simple && is enough but often it's
surprising how quickly that happens.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "bh yuan"
Date:
Subject: Question about shared_buffers and cpu usage
Next
From: Chris
Date:
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?