Re: pg_restore --multi-thread

From: Michael Glaesemann <michael(dot)glaesemann(at)myyearbook(dot)com>
To: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Glaesemann <michael(dot)glaesemann(at)myyearbook(dot)com>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_restore --multi-thread
Date: 2009-02-12 19:16:39
Message-ID: 5984FF10-16FC-45A0-B624-EDD200AE8389@myyearbook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2009-02-12, at 14:15 , Jonah H. Harris wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
> >wrote:
>
>> --num-workers or --num-connections would both work.
>
>
> --num-parallel?

--num-concurrent?

Michael Glaesemann
michael(dot)glaesemann(at)myyearbook(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matteo Beccati 2009-02-12 19:18:31 Re: DISCARD ALL failing to acquire locks on pg_listen
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2009-02-12 19:15:06 Re: pg_restore --multi-thread