Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 17:39:40 +0100
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression
Message-ID: <202503201639.e4siaal3wgnv@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALDaNm1zcLL514UaZ+Jxa0O9rLDzUAYf1nS3h0htKW9PwpfaLA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202503201639.e4siaal3wgnv%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2025-Mar-20, vignesh C wrote:

> Will it help the execution time if we use --jobs in case of pg_dump
> and pg_restore wherever supported:

As I said in another thread, I think we should enable this test to run
without requiring any PG_TEST_EXTRA, because otherwise the only way to
know about problems is to commit a patch and wait for buildfarm to run
it.  Furthermore, I think running all 4 dump format modes is a waste of
time; there isn't any extra coverage by running this test in additional
formats.

Putting those two thoughts together with yours about running with -j,
I propose that what we should do is make this test use -Fc with no
compression (to avoid wasting CPU on that) and use a lowish -j value for
both pg_dump and pg_restore, probably 2, or 3 at most.  (Not more,
because this is likely to run in parallel with other tests anyway.)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada."