Re: pg_upgrade on high number tables database issues - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: pg_upgrade on high number tables database issues
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRBGP+kO4T8a+6C=beHvxK_Vcy6zUdMWE0DjDq+YuvJPmA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade on high number tables database issues  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade on high number tables database issues
List pgsql-hackers



2014-03-10 20:11 GMT+01:00 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 07:40:42PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>     >
>     > There were several bottlenecks in this area removed in 9.2 and 9.3.
>     > Unfortunately the worst of those bottlenecks were in the server, so they
>     depend
>     > on what database you are upgrading from, and so won't help you much
>     upgrading
>     > from 9.1.
>
>     Yes, I assume 9.3 will be much better, though Jeff is right that if it
>     is pg_dump locking that is hurting you, you  might not see a win even in
>     9.3.
>
>
> I'll see it next year when we plan to migrate to 9.4
>
> I though so some form of "superlock" can be interesting, because nobody can
> work with database when it is upgraded.

Remember pg_upgrade is using pg_dump, which then connecting to a
backend, so passing that super-lock mode there is not ideal.  The fixes
in 9.3 improve locking in all user cases, not just upgrades.


nice

Thank you

Pavel
 
--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade on high number tables database issues
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Changeset Extraction v7.9.1