Re: Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20131203171418.GF27105@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 03:33:42PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 04/23/2013 07:53 PM, Timothy Garnett wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >Currently the -j option to pg_restore, which allows for > >parallelization in the restore, can only be used if the input file > >is a regular file and not, for ex., a pipe. However this is a > >pretty common occurrence for us (usually in the form of pg_dump | > >pg_restore to copy an individual database or some tables thereof > >from one machine to another). While there's no good way to > >parallelize the data load steps when reading from a pipe, the > >index and constraint building can still be parallelized and as > >they are generally CPU bound on our machines we've found quite a > >bit of speedup from doing so. > > > >Attached is two diffs off of the REL9_2_4 tag that I've been > >using. The first is a simple change that serially loads the data > >section before handing off the remainder of the restore to the > >existing parallelized restore code (the .ALT. diff). The second > >which gets more parallelization but is a bit more of a change uses > >the existing dependency analysis code to allow index building etc. > >to occur in parallel with data loading. The data loading tasks are > >still performed serially in the main thread, but non-data loading > >tasks are scheduled in parallel as their dependencies are > >satisfied (with the caveat that the main thread can only dispatch > >new tasks between data loads). > > > >Anyways, the question is if people think this is generally useful. > >If so I can clean up the preferred choice a bit and rebase it off > >of master, etc. > > > I don't think these are bad ideas at all, and probably worth doing. > Note that there are some fairly hefty changes affecting this code in > master, so your rebasing could be tricky. Is there any progress on this: doing parallel pg_restore from a pipe? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: