Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Date: 2013-01-20 19:11:48
Message-ID: 26681.1358709108@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> ! * Using pg_restore --single-transaction is faster than other
> ! * methods, like --jobs.

Is this still the case now that Jeff's AtEOXact patch is in? The risk
of locktable overflow with --single-transaction makes me think that
pg_upgrade should avoid it unless there is a *really* strong performance
case for it, and I fear your old measurements are now invalidated.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-01-20 19:26:30 Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-01-20 19:08:05 Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables