Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-12-03T16:23:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > I think Josh Berkus' comments in the thread you mentioned are correct: > >> Actually, I'd say that there's a broad set of cases of people who want >> to do a parallel pg_dump while their system is active. Parallel pg_dump >> on a stopped system will help some people (for migration, particularly) >> but parallel pg_dump with snapshot cloning will help a lot more people. But you failed to quote the rest of what he said: > So: if parallel dump in single-user mode is what you can get done, then > do it. We can always improve it later, and we have to start somewhere. > But we will eventually need parallel pg_dump on active systems, and > that should remain on the TODO list. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company