From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Practical maximums (was Re: PostgreSQL theoretical |
Date: | 2006-08-07 22:07:18 |
Message-ID: | 1154988438.12968.52.camel@dogma.v10.wvs |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 16:51 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Python queues and threads would make that very simple. Master
> thread reads from pg_dump pipe, passing X bytes to a queue, and each
> thread performs this loop:
> - read from queue
> - synchronously write to /dev/stN
Right, you can use threads also. You're doing synchronous writes from
different threads, I was doing asynchronous writes from the same thread.
It's just a matter of preference.
> The disk system would have to be fast enough to keep all X tape
> drives full.
>
The whole point of this is that pg_dump was producing output (from the
disk) faster than you could store it (to the tape), right? So if you use
multiple tapes and stripe with a multiplexing script, that should solve
the problem right?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-08-07 22:09:45 | Re: psql: absolutes and toggles |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-08-07 22:05:01 | Re: psql internal variables |