Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
От | daveg |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20080721014942.GC30869@sonic.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 09:18:29PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Simon Riggs (simon@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 17:43 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > Even this doesn't cover everything though- it's too focused on tables > > > and data loading. Where do functions go? What about types? > > > > Yes, it is focused on tables and data loading. What about > > functions/types? No relevance here. > > I don't see how they're not relevant, it's not like they're being > excluded and in fact they show up in the pre-load output. Heck, even if > they *were* excluded, that should be made clear in the documentation > (either be an explicit include list, or saying they're excluded). > > Part of what's driving this is making sure we have a plan for future > objects and where they'll go. Perhaps it would be enough to just say > "pre-load is everything in the schema, except things which are faster > done in bulk (eg: indexes, keys)". I don't think it's right to say > pre-load is "only object definitions required to load data" when it > includes functions and ACLs though. > > Hopefully my suggestion and these comments will get us to a happy > middle-ground. One observation, indexes should be built right after the table data is loaded for each table, this way, the index build gets a hot cache for the table data instead of having to re-read it later as we do now. -dg -- David Gould daveg@sonic.net 510 536 1443 510 282 0869 If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: