Re: pg_dump object sorting
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump object sorting |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 48038CA3.9050006@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump object sorting (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump object sorting
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis wrote: > On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 11:18 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> I have been looking at refining the sorting of objects in pg_dump to >> make it take advantage of buffering and synchronised scanning, and >> possibly make parallel restoration simpler and more efficient. >> >> > > Synchronized scanning is explicitly disabled in pg_dump. That was a > last-minute change to answer Greg Stark's complaint about dumping a > clustered table: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00987.php > > That hopefully won't be a permanent solution, because I think > synchronized scans are useful for pg_dump. > > However, I'm not clear on how the pg_dump order would be able to better > take advantage of synchronized scans anyway. What did you have in mind? > > > I should have expressed it better. The idea is to have pg_dump emit the objects in an order that allows the restore to take advantage of sync scans. So sync scans being disabled in pg_dump would not at all matter. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: