Re: [PERFORM] Slow BLOBs restoring

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Slow BLOBs restoring
Date: 2010-12-09 16:01:41
Message-ID: 4D00FD65.1020501@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On 12/09/2010 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think what we need to do is make fix_dependencies
> build a reverse lookup list of all the objects dependent on each TOC
> object, so that the searching behavior in reduce_dependencies can be
> eliminated outright. That will take O(N) time and O(N) extra space,
> which is a good tradeoff because you won't care if N is small, while if
> N is large you have got to have it anyway.
>
> Barring objections, I will do this and back-patch into 9.0. There is
> maybe some case for trying to fix 8.4 as well, but since 8.4 didn't
> make a separate TOC entry for each blob, it isn't as exposed to the
> problem. We didn't back-patch the last round of efficiency hacks in
> this area, so I'm thinking it's not necessary here either. Comments?
>
>

Sound good. Re 8.4: at a pinch people could probably use the 9.0
pg_restore with their 8.4 dump.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gabi Julien 2010-12-09 16:24:09 Re: Postgresql 9.1 pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp limitations
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-12-09 15:56:39 Re: [PERFORM] Slow BLOBs restoring

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John W Strange 2010-12-10 01:57:17 Re: Hardware recommendations
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-12-09 15:56:39 Re: [PERFORM] Slow BLOBs restoring