| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Better support of exported snapshots with pg_dump |
| Date: | 2014-10-15 06:06:46 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSUbT59OEX-9C0VsaKCS+t8dAx6ZJ5qgo4EF0Y-Lk8v-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
> > This seems more user-friendly. But well I agree that we could do
> > a larger set of things that could be used for even other purposes:
> > - Ability to define snapshot name with pg_dump
> > - Take system or database-wide lock
> > - Extra client application running the whole
> > Now is this set of features worth doing knowing that export snapshot has
> > been designed for multi-threaded closed applications? Not much sure.
> > Regards,
>
> What do you mean with "designed for multi-threaded closed applications"?
>
External snapshots creation and control should be localized within
dedicated client applications only. At least that's what I understand from
it as that's how it is used now.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-10-15 07:47:48 | Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-10-15 06:03:09 | Re: WIP: dynahash replacement for buffer table |