Re: parallel pg_restore - WIP patch
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Russell Smith <mr-russ@pws.com.au>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker@gmail.com>
Date: 2008-09-29T19:54:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> Um, FKs could conflict with each other too, so that by itself isn't >>> gonna fix anything. > >> Good point. Looks like we'll need to make a list of "can't run in >> parallel with" items as well as strict dependencies. > > Yeah, I was just thinking about that. The current archive format > doesn't really carry enough information for this. I think there > are two basic solutions we could adopt: > > * Extend the archive format to provide some indication that "restoring > this object requires exclusive access to these dependencies". > > * Hardwire knowledge into pg_restore that certain types of objects > require exclusive access to their dependencies. > > The former seems more flexible, as well as more in tune with the basic > design assumption that pg_restore shouldn't have a lot of knowledge > about individual archive object types. But it would mean that you > couldn't use parallel restore with any pre-8.4 dumps. In the long run > that's no big deal, but in the short run it's annoying. hmm not sure how much of a problem that really is - we usually recommend to use the pg_dump version of the target database anyway. Stefan