From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:46:41 -0500
Message-ID: <Z_VE4Q4A2nNCX3Ny@nathan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMT0RQRL08=Si+9V7RW7VKcbo2H7GO6ME3opkS_WHpE8qctBLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMT0RQSS-6qLH+zYsOeUbAYhop3wmQTkNmQpo5--QRDUR+qYmQ@mail.gmail.com>
<Z_RO37whB1L2LbiD@nathan>
<CAMT0RQRL08=Si+9V7RW7VKcbo2H7GO6ME3opkS_WHpE8qctBLg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 09:35:24AM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 12:17 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That being said, I
>> regularly hear about slow upgrades with many LOs, so I think it'd be
>> worthwhile to try to improve matters in v19.
>
> Changing the LO export to dumping pg_largeobject_metadata content
> instead of creating the LOs should be a nice small change confined to
> pg_dump --binary-upgrade only so perhaps we could squeeze it in v18
> still.
Feature freeze for v18 was ~4 hours ago, so unfortunately this is v19
material at this point.
--
nathan
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: nathandbossart@gmail.com, hannuk@google.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects
In-Reply-To: <Z_VE4Q4A2nNCX3Ny@nathan>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox