From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump --snapshot |
Date: | 2013-05-06 17:23:56 |
Message-ID: | 20130506172356.GB8266@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-05-06 13:07:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 6 May 2013 16:02, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> >> On 05/06/2013 10:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >>> This overrides the internally generated snapshot in parallel pg_dump.
>
> >> Could you be a bit more expansive about the use case, please?
>
> > Exported snapshots allow you to coordinate a number of actions
> > together, so they all see a common view of the database. So this patch
> > allows a very general approach to this, much more so than pg_dump
> > allows currently since the exact timing of the snapshot is not
> > controlled by the user.
>
> I'm afraid that this is institutionalizing a design deficiency in
> pg_dump; namely that it takes its snapshot before acquiring locks.
> Ideally that would happen the other way around. I don't have a good
> idea how we could fix that --- but a feature that allows imposition
> of an outside snapshot will permanently foreclose ever fixing it.
>
> What's more, this would greatly widen the risk window between when
> the snapshot is taken and when we have all the locks and can have
> some confidence that the DB isn't changing under us.
The initial transaction that exports the transaction would need to hold
locks until pg_dump started :/.
> Or in short: -1 for the very concept of letting the user control
> pg_dump's snapshot.
Its rather useful if you e.g. want to instantiate a new replica without
rebuilding pg_dump/pg_restore's capabilities wrt. ordering, parallelism,
separating initial data load from index creation and all that. Which
already has been incompletely reinvented by several solutions :(.
So besides the above and real problems you point out this seems
worthwile to me...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-05-06 17:58:45 | Re: pg_dump --snapshot |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-05-06 17:23:40 | Re: pg_dump versus materialized views |