Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Subject: Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only
Date: 2011-12-07 17:48:26
Message-ID: 4EDFA6EA.4010900@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/07/2011 11:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>>>> Note that this feature has the odd effect that some constraints are loaded at the same time as the tables and some are loaded with the post-data. This is consistent with how text-mode pg_dump has always worked, but will seem odd to the user. This also raises the possibility of a future pg_dump/pg_restore optimization.
>>> That does seem odd. Why do we do it that way?
>> Beats me.
> Performance, mostly --- we prefer to apply checks during the original
> data load if possible, but for indexes and FK constraints it's faster to
> apply them later. Also, we can separate constraints from the original
> table declaration if it's necessary to break a reference circularity.
> This isn't something that would be wise to whack around.
>
>

Yeah, and if we did want to change it that should be a TODO and not hold
up this feature.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-12-07 17:52:23 Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem
Previous Message Scott Mead 2011-12-07 16:45:41 Re: IDLE in transaction introspection