Re: Option to dump foreign data in pg_dump
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Option to dump foreign data in pg_dump |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8b1efca1-129d-60dc-7e4c-e7c11aae1e94@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Option to dump foreign data in pg_dump (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Option to dump foreign data in pg_dump
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Luis, On 1/29/20 11:05 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2020-01-21 10:36, Luis Carril wrote: >>> Yes we can support --include-foreign-data without parallel option and >>> later add support for parallel option as a different patch. >> >> Hi, >> >> I've attached a new version of the patch in which an error is >> emitted if the parallel backup is used with the --include-foreign-data >> option. > > This seems like an overreaction. The whole point of > lockTableForWorker() is to avoid deadlocks, but foreign tables don't > have locks, so it's not a problem. I think you can just skip foreign > tables in lockTableForWorker() using the same logic that getTables() uses. > > I think parallel data dump would be an especially interesting option > when using foreign tables, so it's worth figuring this out. What do you think of Peter's comment? Regards, -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: