pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 11:06:50 -0400
Message-ID: <20120531150650.GG26894@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoY3J3h8bi00JZf5i2VbfpU39kRfDQfuv9hOH9z7PUx87Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120529.185149.1127748531209576379.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
	<20120531.174526.2183902405630094684.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
	<CAM9pMnM9vLd8HiNCqeskMwij4MAEjSb76pKDRnnh=uRpL4U17A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120531.230757.2014494683420217075.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
	<CAM9pMnPQb9PUxWAx_VGVCb41ta08rW2AA_G6XXnp+2FcuB1BXQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGTBQpaW5O7vUKMrWGn+xUJR-Ni-FEQB_DUZMB_Gt_a-uMp8WA@mail.gmail.com>
	<9787.1338474676@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmoa3OjFGfkru-XkbxKyysCWLHX-s4y1yVZYwYSdGp0Pc3A@mail.gmail.com>
	<10443.1338475851@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoY3J3h8bi00JZf5i2VbfpU39kRfDQfuv9hOH9z7PUx87Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:04:12AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >>> I'm not; Jeff Janes is.  But you shouldn't be holding your breath
> >>> anyway, since it's 9.3 material at this point.
> >
> >> I agree we can't back-patch that change, but then I think we ought to
> >> consider back-patching some variant of Tatsuo's patch.  Maybe it's not
> >> reasonable to thunk an arbitrary number of relation names in there on
> >> one line, but how about 1000 relations per LOCK statement or so?  I
> >> guess we'd need to see how much that erodes the benefit, but we've
> >> certainly done back-branch rearrangements in pg_dump in the past to
> >> fix various kinds of issues, and this is pretty non-invasive.
> >
> > I am not convinced either that this patch will still be useful after
> > Jeff's fix goes in, ...
> 
> But people on older branches are not going to GET Jeff's fix.

FYI, if it got into Postgres 9.2, everyone upgrading to Postgres 9.2
would benefit because pg_upgrade uses the new cluster's pg_dumpall.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



view thread (66+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20120531150650.GG26894@momjian.us>
Permalink:  ../20120531150650.GG26894@momjian.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20120531150650.GG26894@momjian.us

 · 

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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: bruce@momjian.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, klaussfreire@gmail.com, shortcutter@googlemail.com, ishii@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and thousands of schemas
  In-Reply-To: <20120531150650.GG26894@momjian.us>

* 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