Re: small parallel restore optimization

From: Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
Subject: Re: small parallel restore optimization
Date: 2009-03-06 17:58:58
Message-ID: 1d4e0c10903060958v5ca7aaedlc8a5d1bbd37545ac@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Can you put together even a weakly reproducible test case?  Something
> that only fails every tenth or hundredth time would still help.

It seems that Olivier can reproduce the problem at will on Unixware. I
don't know if it's easy to find useful information to debug the
problem on this platform though.

See http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-03/msg00201.php

--
Guillaume

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-03-06 18:57:53 Re: Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-03-06 17:36:46 Re: Writing values to relation using bytearray ...