Re: State of Beta 2

From: Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>
To: PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: State of Beta 2
Date: 2003-09-23 00:13:36
Message-ID: 1064276015.21685.493.camel@haggis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 18:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Fair enough. On another front then... would all this energy we are
> > talking about with pg_upgrade
> > be better spent on pg_dump/pg_dumpall/pg_restore?
>
> Well, we need to work on pg_dump too. But I don't foresee it ever
> getting fast enough to satisfy the folks who want zero-downtime

Multi-threaded pg_dump.

"It'll choke the IO system!!!" you say? Well, heck, get a better
IO system!!!!

Or... use fewer threads.

No, it won't eliminate down-time, but is necessary for big data-
bases.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net
Jefferson, LA USA

"You ask us the same question every day, and we give you the
same answer every day. Someday, we hope that you will believe us..."
U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to a reporter

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2003-09-23 00:14:50 Re: Foreign key constraint accepted even when not same
Previous Message Richard Welty 2003-09-22 23:48:14 Re: PostgreSQL versus MySQL