Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22234.1180128523@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS |
Список | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Erik Jones wrote: >> And, to finish up, is there any reason that pg_restore couldn't >> already work with separate processes working in parallel? > The problem is that the ordering of objects in the dump is the only > thing that makes the dump consistent with regards to the dependencies of > objects. So pg_restore cannot make any assumptions of parallelisability > of the restoration process of objects in the dump. That's true at the level of DDL operations, but AFAIK we could parallelize table-loading and index-creation steps pretty effectively --- and that's where all the time goes. A more interesting question is what sort of hardware you need for that actually to be a win, though. Loading a few tables in parallel sounds like an ideal recipe for oversaturating your disk bandwidth... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: