Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
Date: 2010-12-03 17:17:11
Message-ID: 1291396575-sup-9640@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie dic 03 13:56:32 -0300 2010:

> I know the use cases are limited, but I think it's still useful on its own.

I don't understand what's so difficult about starting with the snapshot
cloning patch. AFAIR it's already been written anyway, no?

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Weimer 2010-12-03 17:36:45 Re: Idle git question: how come so many "objects"?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-12-03 16:56:32 Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump