Re: Parallel pg_restore versus old dump files - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: Parallel pg_restore versus old dump files
Date
Msg-id AANLkTilUuDdynIcJFqUeH96RooV_h0VIYsCTAYL8yBKF@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel pg_restore versus old dump files  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 03:26, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>> 4. Is there any value in back-porting the Windows FSEEKO support into
>>> 8.3 and 8.2?  Arguably, not writing the data offsets is a performance
>>> bug.  However a back-port won't do anything for people who are dumping
>>> with less than the latest minor release of pg_dump, so doing this might
>>> be largely wasted effort.
>
>> I doubt it's worth it, but I could be persuaded otherwise.
>
> I'm leaning in that direction too.  Anybody who's doing a version
> upgrade really ought to be using the newer pg_dump version anyway ...

+1 on not backpatching that stuff - it's build system related, so it's
kind of fragile on the windows side :-)

-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel pg_restore versus old dump files