| From: | Hari Krishna Sunder <hari(dot)db(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 杨伯宇(长堂) <yangboyu(dot)yby(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 回复：Re: 回复：Re: speed up pg_upgrade with large number of tables |
| Date: | 2025-01-19 23:57:18 |
| Message-ID: | CAAeiqZ00_O=GTq6qrG7wfXOjrU4v3HMDuNX8mOP8AH6AWQBiaw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The restore side speedups suggested by Yang seem reasonable and can
potentially speed up the process. We can even go a bit further by starting
the new postgres in a --binary-upgrade mode and skip some of these locks
completely.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 3:43 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 03:22:36PM +0800, 杨伯宇(长堂) wrote:
> > Besides, https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4995/ seems insufficient
> to
> > this situation. Some time-consuming functions like
> check_for_data_types_usage
> > are not yet able to run in parallel. But these patches could be a great
> > starting point for a more efficient parallelism implementation. Maybe we
> can
> > do it later.
>
> I actually just wrote up the first version of the patch for parallelizing
> the data type checks over the weekend. I'll post it shortly.
>
> --
> nathan
>
>
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-01-20 00:03:29 | Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-01-19 23:57:09 | Re: attndims, typndims still not enforced, but make the value within a sane threshold |