Re: patch for parallel pg_dump

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
Date: 2012-02-16 18:29:10
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYrioQ+av0coNy+w=p=02Rvu-W__vjidsw-ZmKU96sU5A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de> wrote:
>> So we at least need to press on far enough to get to that point.
>
> Sure, let me know if I can help you with something.

Alright. I think (hope) that I've pushed this far enough to serve the
needs of parallel pg_dump. The error handling is still pretty grotty
and might need a bit more surgery to handle the parallel case, but I
think that making this actually not ugly will require eliminating the
Archive/ArchiveHandle distinction, which is probably a good thing to
do but, as you point out, maybe not the first priority right now.

Can you provide an updated patch?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2012-02-16 18:32:09 Re: possible new option for wal_sync_method
Previous Message Jay Levitt 2012-02-16 18:18:24 Re: Designing an extension for feature-space similarity search