Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS

From: "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
Date: 2007-05-24 22:34:35
Message-ID: 377ABCF8-A407-47F3-88A8-F24FCD79D9B6@themactionfaction.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


On May 24, 2007, at 18:21 , Chris Browne wrote:
>
> Jan Wieck had a proposal to a similar effect, namely to give some way
> to get one connection to duplicate the state of another one.
>
> This would permit doing a neat parallel decomposition of pg_dump: you
> could do a 4-way parallelization of it that would function something
> like the following:
>
> - connection 1 opens, establishes the usual serialized mode
> transaction
>
> - connection 1 dumps the table metadata into one or more files in a
> specified directory
>
> - then it forks 3 more connections, and seeds them with the same
> serialized mode state
>
> - it then goes thru and can dump 4 tables concurrently at a time,
> one apiece to a file in the directory.
>
> This could considerably improve speed of dumps, possibly of restores,
> too.
>
> Note that this isn't related to subtransactions...

Well, I was thinking that since transactions are now serializable, it
should be possible to move the state between existing open transactions.

-M

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Nolan 2007-05-24 22:34:57 Re: Corrupted index file after restoring WAL on warm spare server
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-05-24 22:32:23 Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS