Re: Database restore speed

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "David Lang" <dlang(at)invendra(dot)net>, "Steve Oualline" <soualline(at)stbernard(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database restore speed
Date: 2005-12-03 20:32:20
Message-ID: 2404.1133641940@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

"Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> Last I looked at the Postgres binary dump format, it was not portable or
> efficient enough to suit the need. The efficiency problem with it was that
> there was descriptive information attached to each individual data item, as
> compared to the approach where that information is specified once for the
> data group as a template for input.

Are you complaining about the length words? Get real...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Luke Lonergan 2005-12-03 21:29:01 Re: Database restore speed
Previous Message Luke Lonergan 2005-12-03 19:42:02 Re: Database restore speed