| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression |
| Date: | 2025-03-20 16:39:40 |
| Message-ID: | 202503201639.e4siaal3wgnv@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-Mar-20, vignesh C wrote:
> Will it help the execution time if we use --jobs in case of pg_dump
> and pg_restore wherever supported:
As I said in another thread, I think we should enable this test to run
without requiring any PG_TEST_EXTRA, because otherwise the only way to
know about problems is to commit a patch and wait for buildfarm to run
it. Furthermore, I think running all 4 dump format modes is a waste of
time; there isn't any extra coverage by running this test in additional
formats.
Putting those two thoughts together with yours about running with -j,
I propose that what we should do is make this test use -Fc with no
compression (to avoid wasting CPU on that) and use a lowish -j value for
both pg_dump and pg_restore, probably 2, or 3 at most. (Not more,
because this is likely to run in parallel with other tests anyway.)
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada."
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mahendra Singh Thalor | 2025-03-20 16:43:56 | Re: change on_exit_nicely_list array to the dynamic array to increase slots at run time for pg_restore |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-03-20 16:11:46 | Re: optimize file transfer in pg_upgrade |