Re: doc: expand note about pg_upgrade's --jobs option

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: doc: expand note about pg_upgrade's --jobs option
Date: 2025-03-05 16:28:50
Message-ID: Z8h7wjNJmngqHhK9@nathan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 09:35:27AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 01:52:40PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Another option that I think would also work is to just cut down the details
>> to just "The <option>--jobs</option> option allows multiple CPU cores to be
>> used".
>
> That's fine with me. It's probably not particularly actionable
> information, anyway. If anything, IMHO we should make it clear to users
> that the parallelization is per-database (except for file transfer, which
> is per-tablespace). If you've just got one big database in the default
> tablespace, --jobs won't help.
>
>> I think this is also slightly confusing, but maybe that's a
>> non-native-english thing: "a good place to start is the maximum of the
>> number of CPU cores and tablespaces.". Am I supposed to set it to
>> max(cpucores, ntablespaces) or to max(cpucores+ntablespaces)?
>
> I've always read it to mean the former. But I'm not sure that's great
> advice. If you have 8 cores and 100 tablespaces, does it make sense to use
> --jobs=100? Ordinarily, I'd suggest the number of cores as the starting
> point.

Here's another attempt at the patch based on the latest discussion.

--
nathan

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-doc-Adjust-note-about-pg_upgrade-s-jobs-option.patch text/plain 1.5 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-03-05 16:40:22 Re: Use Python "Limited API" in PL/Python
Previous Message Tom Lane 2025-03-05 16:19:46 Re: Should we add debug_parallel_query=regress to CI?