Re: Review: Revise parallel pg_restore's scheduling heuristic

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I don't have time to look right now, but ISTM the original discussion
>> that led to making that patch had ideas about scenarios where it would
>> be faster.

> This is what I've been able to find on a quick look:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-05/msg00678.php

> Sounds like Kevin may want to try renaming some of his indices to
> produce intermingling...

Also, the followup to that message points out that the 8.4.0 code has a
potential O(N^2) dependency on the total number of TOC items in the
dump.  So it might be interesting to check the behavior with very large
numbers of tables/indexes.
        regards, tom lane