| From: | richard coleman <rcoleman(dot)ascentgl(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rui DeSousa <rui(at)crazybean(dot)net>, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump why no indicator of completion |
| Date: | 2023-05-01 15:10:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAGA3vBvdzK-CyJGwd5eJ1gABceyCVHYgoML=n=uO0BbHhtD=hQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Scott,
I do use multiple processes, when I use the directory output option which
is the only one that supports it.
I will admit that I haven't tried writing custom binary outputs yet,
typically using either the builtin custom format or directory format.
rik.
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 10:48 AM Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com>
wrote:
> > On May 1, 2023, at 8:34 AM, richard coleman <rcoleman(dot)ascentgl(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > As I've asked Ron, if pg_dump isn't fit for purpose, then what do you
> believe is?
>
> He didn't say pg_dump wasn't fit for purpose. He said use a binary format
> and multiple processes--which are pg_dump options.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-05-01 15:25:55 | Re: pg_dump why no indicator of completion |
| Previous Message | Scott Ribe | 2023-05-01 14:48:08 | Re: pg_dump why no indicator of completion |