Re: pg_dump directory archive format / parallel pg_dump
От | Joachim Wieland |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump directory archive format / parallel pg_dump |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTi=9SEkMdG0wkEGPCsVh9gd6jYohFXDO6gwL+5vo@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump directory archive format / parallel pg_dump (Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump directory archive format / parallel pg_dump
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 13:34, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> So how close are we to having a committable version of this? Should >> we push this out to 9.2? > > I think so. The feature is pretty attractive, but more works are required: > * Re-base on synchronized snapshots patch > * Consider to use pipe also on Windows. > * Research libpq + fork() issue. We have a warning in docs: > http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/libpq-connect.html > | On Unix, forking a process with open libpq connections can lead to > unpredictable results Just for the records, once the sync snapshot patch is committed, there is no need to do fancy libpq + fork() combinations anyway. Unfortunately, so far no committer has commented on the synchronized snapshot patch at all. I am not fighting for getting parallel pg_dump done in 9.1, as I don't really have a personal use case for the patch. However it would be the irony of the year if we shipped 9.1 with a synchronized snapshot patch but no parallel dump :-) Joachim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: