Re: pgsql: pg_restore -jN does not equate "multiple jobs", so partly revert

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 13:25 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 21:32 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 00:06 +0000, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > > > > Log Message:
> > > > > > -----------
> > > > > > pg_restore -jN does not equate "multiple jobs", so partly revert the
> > > > > > previous patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > I notice that the release notes talk about "parallel restore", yet the
> > > > > word parallel is not used in the docs anywhere. The section on restoring
> > > > > a dump makes no mention of this new facility,
> > >
> > > The doc patch you applied does nothing to address these points
> >
> > We don't usually modify past release notes.
>
> Cool, but my comment has nothing to do with that. Please reread.

I don't see any performance mentions in the restore docs so I am unclear
why we should add them there:

    http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/backup-dump.html#BACKUP-DUMP-RESTORE

We mention all the performance stuff in the performance section:

    http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/populate.html#POPULATE-PG-DUMP

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
  PG East:  http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +