public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Kumar, Sachin <[email protected]>
Cc: Robins Tharakan <[email protected]>
Cc: Jan Wieck <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 16:48:20 -0600
Message-ID: <20240112224820.GB3857154@nathanxps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAAWbhmgUb8p7ff_ZX5jCvqM=ipPxbbDJTXMNVzH-Ho_CXVkRHA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 03:02:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> On further reflection, there is a very good reason why it's done like
> that. Because pg_upgrade is doing schema-only dump and restore,
> there's next to no opportunity for parallelism within either pg_dump
> or pg_restore. There's no data-loading steps, and there's no
> index-building either, so the time-consuming stuff that could be
> parallelized just isn't happening in pg_upgrade's usage.
>
> Now it's true that my 0003 patch moves the needle a little bit:
> since it makes BLOB creation (as opposed to loading) parallelizable,
> there'd be some hope for parallel pg_restore doing something useful in
> a database with very many blobs. But it makes no sense to remove the
> existing cross-database parallelism in pursuit of that; you'd make
> many more people unhappy than happy.
I assume the concern is that we'd end up multiplying the effective number
of workers if we parallelized both in-database and cross-database? Would
it be sufficient to make those separately configurable with a note about
the multiplicative effects of setting both? I think it'd be unfortunate if
pg_upgrade completely missed out on this improvement.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
view thread (18+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects
In-Reply-To: <20240112224820.GB3857154@nathanxps13>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox