Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Craig James <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com>, Hugo <hugo(dot)tech(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Date: 2012-05-25 17:41:19
Message-ID: CAMkU=1y_juK5VW8tp0HB009H8oWXzXdCFf6tu2AK=QB6FLwvwQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
>> For dumping entire databases, It looks like the biggest problem is
>> going to be LockReassignCurrentOwner in the server.  And that doesn't
>> seem to be easy to fix, as any change to it to improve pg_dump will
>> risk degrading normal use cases.
>
> I didn't try profiling the server side, but pg_dump doesn't use
> subtransactions so it's not clear to me why LockReassignCurrentOwner
> would get called at all ...

I thought that every select statement in a repeatable read transaction
ran in a separate "portal", and that a portal is a flavor of
subtransaction. Anyway, it does show up at the top of a profile of
the server, so it is getting called somehow.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-05-25 17:41:24 Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-05-25 16:56:17 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-05-25 20:02:50 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-05-25 16:56:17 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas