Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Asif Rehman <asifr.rehman@gmail.com>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-11-27T19:57:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix failures in incremental_sort due to number of workers
- 23ba3b5ee278 13.0 cited
-
In jsonb_plpython.c, suppress warning message from gcc 10.
- a06921816370 13.0 cited
-
Fix minor problems with non-exclusive backup cleanup.
- 303640199d04 13.0 cited
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:38 AM Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > I am still not sure why we need SEND_BACKUP_FILELIST as a separate command. > Can't we return the file list with START_BACKUP itself? I had the same thought, but I think it's better to keep them separate. Somebody might want to use the SEND_BACKUP_FILELIST command for something other than a backup (I actually think it should be called just SEND_FILE_LIST). Somebody might want to start a backup without getting a file list because they're going to copy the files at the FS level. Somebody might want to get a list of files to process after somebody else has started the backup on another connection. Or maybe nobody wants to do any of those things, but it doesn't seem to cost us much of anything to split the commands, so I think we should. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company