| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bootstrap DATA is a pita |
| Date: | 2015-03-07 23:30:29 |
| Message-ID: | 54FB8A15.5060504@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/07/2015 05:46 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-03-07 16:43:15 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Semi-related... if we put some special handling in some places for bootstrap
>> mode, couldn't most catalog objects be created using SQL, once we got
>> pg_class, pg_attributes and pg_type created? That would theoretically allow
>> us to drive much more of initdb with plain SQL (possibly created via
>> pg_dump).
> Several people have now made that suggestion, but I *seriously* doubt
> that we actually want to go there. The overhead of executing SQL
> commands in comparison to the bki stuff is really rather
> noticeable. Doing the majority of the large number of insertions via SQL
> will make initdb noticeably slower. And it's already annoyingly
> slow. Besides make install it's probably the thing I wait most for
> during development.
My reaction exactly. We should not make users pay a price for
developers' convenience.
>
> That's besides the fact that SQL commands aren't actually that
> comfortably editable in bulk.
Indeed.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adam Brightwell | 2015-03-07 23:40:18 | Re: CATUPDATE confusion? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-03-07 22:49:21 | Re: Question about lazy_space_alloc() / linux over-commit |