| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Date: | 2010-12-14 22:13:35 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTik8xPK-mLuv_g5oG+igPU5hhQeFzwdGry7_KEzt@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This is what Postgres-XC is doing between a coordinator and a
> datanode. Coordinator may correspond to poolers/loadbalancers.
> Does anyone think it makes sense to extract XC implementation of
> snapshot shipping to PostgreSQL itself?
Perhaps, though of course it would need to be re-licensed. I'd be
happy to see us pursue a snapshot cloning framework, wherever it comes
from. I remain unconvinced that it should be made a hard requirement
for parallel pg_dump, but of course if we can get it implemented then
the point becomes moot.
Let's not let this fall on the floor. Someone should pursue this,
whether it's Joachim or Koichi or someone else.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-14 22:14:28 | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-14 21:55:05 | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST |