Horton

Re: Inefficiency in parallel pg_restore with many tables

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-07-25T18:53:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 12:00:15PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here is a sketch of this approach.  It required fewer #ifdefs than I was
> expecting.  At the moment, this one seems like the winner to me.

Here is a polished patch set for this approach.  I've also added a 0004
that replaces the open-coded heap in pg_dump_sort.c with a binaryheap.
IMHO these patches are in decent shape.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commits

  1. Remove open-coded binary heap in pg_dump_sort.c.

  2. Convert pg_restore's ready_list to a priority queue.

  3. Add function for removing arbitrary nodes in binaryheap.

  4. Make binaryheap available to frontend code.