From: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Parallel backups (was Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS) |
Date: | 2007-05-24 23:33:12 |
Message-ID: | 465620B8.2040107@cox.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 05/24/07 17:21, Chris Browne wrote:
[snip]
>
> This would permit doing a neat parallel decomposition of pg_dump: you
> could do a 4-way parallelization of it that would function something
> like the following:
>
> - connection 1 opens, establishes the usual serialized mode transaction
>
> - connection 1 dumps the table metadata into one or more files in a
> specified directory
>
> - then it forks 3 more connections, and seeds them with the same
> serialized mode state
>
> - it then goes thru and can dump 4 tables concurrently at a time,
> one apiece to a file in the directory.
>
> This could considerably improve speed of dumps, possibly of restores,
> too.
What about a master thread that "establishes the usual serialized
mode transaction" and then issues N asynchronous requests to the
database, and as they return with data, pipe the data to N number of
corresponding "writer" threads. Matching N to the number of tape
drives comes to mind.
Yes, the master thread would be the choke point, but CPUs and RAM
are still a heck of a lot faster than disks, so maybe it wouldn't be
such a problem after all.
Of course, if libpq(??) doesn't handle async IO, then it's not such
a good idea after all.
> Note that this isn't related to subtransactions...
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGViC4S9HxQb37XmcRAgkAAKC4pyZQWDF01S17uITbOkcj+KY8lgCg40pi
2B3xg2tnp554GGP0VsgACWE=
=eIUP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Raymond C. Rodgers | 2007-05-24 23:44:53 | Inheritance question |
Previous Message | George Pavlov | 2007-05-24 23:15:54 | index vs. seq scan choice? |