Re: Testing of parallel restore with current snapshot

I don't see this as every having been applied. What should we do with
it?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom,
> >> Is anyone interested enough to try it if I code it?
>
> > If you're patient for results, sure. I seem to be doing a customer
> > migration or upgrade every week now, so it wouldn't take me long to have
> > a test subject with a fairly complex database.
>
> Here's a draft patch that does ordering using two lists, as I proposed.
> Please test to see if it's any faster or slower than the original logic.
>
> Note: since this changes struct TocEntry, be sure to recompile all files
> in src/bin/pg_dump/ after patching.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

Content-Description: alternate-parallel-restore-1.patch.gz

[ Type application/octet-stream treated as attachment, skipping... ]

>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +