Re: Improvements in pg_dump/pg_restore toc format and performances

From: Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improvements in pg_dump/pg_restore toc format and performances
Date: 2023-09-19 08:25:09
Message-ID: 1867814.CQOukoFCf9@peanuts2
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Monday, September 18, 2023 11:54:42 PM CEST Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 02:52:47PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 10:51:11AM +0200, Pierre Ducroquet wrote:
> >> I ended up writing several patches that shaved some time for pg_restore
> >> -l,
> >> and reduced the toc.dat size.
> >
> > I've only just started taking a look at these patches, and I intend to do
> > a
> > more thorough review in the hopefully-not-too-distant future.
>
> Since cfbot is failing on some pg_upgrade and pg_dump tests, I've set this
> to waiting-on-author.

FYI, the failures are related to patch 0004, I said it was dirty, but it was
apparently an understatement. Patches 0001 to 0003 don't exhibit any
regression.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yugo NAGATA 2023-09-19 08:30:11 Re: pgbnech: allow to cancel queries during benchmark
Previous Message Andrey Lepikhov 2023-09-19 08:21:15 Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions