Re: improve performance of pg_dump --binary-upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Corey Huinker
Subject Re: improve performance of pg_dump --binary-upgrade
Date
Msg-id CADkLM=fDR9msTafzrmm==aoNu6FvTj4OZxphmODHjU_zxW5A3w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to improve performance of pg_dump --binary-upgrade  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: improve performance of pg_dump --binary-upgrade
Re: improve performance of pg_dump --binary-upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
One downside of this approach is the memory usage.  This was more-or-less


Bar-napkin math tells me in a worst-case architecture and braindead byte alignment, we'd burn 64 bytes per struct, so the 100K tables cited would be about 6.25MB of memory.

The obvious low-memory alternative would be to make a prepared statement, though that does nothing to cut down on the roundtrips.

I think this is a good trade off.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Japin Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Cannot find a working 64-bit integer type on Illumos
Next
From: shveta malik
Date:
Subject: Re: Disallow changing slot's failover option in transaction block