| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Date: | 2010-12-06 15:38:13 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimY2w1yKN0_GktufDaO7ieuOc6++dfhy=SVdend@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> On 12/06/2010 10:22 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06.12.2010 15:53, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I guess. It still seems far too much like exposing the server's guts
>>>> for my taste. It might not be as bad as the expression tree stuff,
>>>> but there's nothing particularly good about it either.
>>>
>>> Note that we already have txid_current_snapshot() function, which exposes
>>> all that.
>>
>> Fair enough, and I think that's actually useful for Slony&c. But I
>> don't think we should shy away of providing a cleaner API here.
>>
>
> Just don't let the perfect get in the way of the good :P
I'll keep that in mind. :-)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-06 15:40:44 | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-12-06 15:35:56 | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |