Thanks Tom for the explanation. I assumed it was my ignorance of how the schema was handled that was making this look
likea problem that had already been solved and I was missing something.
I fully expected the "You're Doing It Wrong" part. That is out of my control but not beyond my influence.
I suspect I know the answer to this but have to ask. Using a simplified example where there are 100K sets of 4 tables,
eachrepresenting the output of a single job, are there any shortcuts to upgrading that would circumvent exporting the
entireschema? I'm sure a different DB design would be better but that's not what I'm working with.
Thanks
________________________________________
From: Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2019 4:57 PM
To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade --jobs
On 4/6/19 6:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
senor <frio_cervesa@hotmail.com><mailto:frio_cervesa@hotmail.com> writes:
[snip]
The --link option to pg_upgrade would be so much more useful if it
weren't still bound to serially dumping the schemas of half a million
tables.
To be perfectly blunt, if you've got a database with half a million
tables, You're Doing It Wrong.
Heavy (really heavy) partitioning?
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
