Re: Review: Revise parallel pg_restore's scheduling heuristic

"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> So should we give up on this patch?

> No, this is not news; just confirmation of the earlier gut feelings
> and less convincing statistics that there is no problem. Tom's
> argument that if there's no slowdown for common cases, preventing
> O(N^2) behavior for extreme cases is compelling for me, and we've
> beaten up on it enough for me to feel comfortable that it doesn't
> break anything.

Yeah. I had hoped to see some evidence of actual improvement for common
cases, but we haven't got that. What we do have is evidence that it's
not making common cases worse, so avoiding the possible O(N^2) behavior
for extreme cases seems like a reasonable argument for committing it
anyway.

I'll go ahead and commit it just to get it out of the queue ... we
can always revert the commit if new info surfaces.

regards, tom lane