Re: add --no-sync to pg_upgrade's calls to pg_dump and pg_dumpall

> On 9 May 2024, at 21:34, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 09:03:56AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> +1.  Could there be an argument in favor of a backpatch?  This is a
>> performance improvement, but one could also side that the addition of
>> sync support in pg_dump[all] has made that a regression that we'd
>> better fix because the flushes don't matter in this context.  They
>> also bring costs for no gain.
> 
> I don't see a strong need to back-patch this, if for no other reason than
> it seems to have gone unnoticed for 7 major versions.  Plus, based on my
> admittedly limited testing, this is unlikely to provide significant
> improvements.

Agreed, this is a nice little improvement but it's unlikely to be enough of a
speedup to warrant changing the backbranches.

--
Daniel Gustafsson