Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 2287.1291670141@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump (marcin mank <marcin.mank@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump
Re: WIP patch for parallel pg_dump |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
marcin mank <marcin.mank@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> IIRC, in old discussions of this problem we first considered allowing
>> clients to pull down an explicit representation of their snapshot (which
>> actually is an existing feature now, txid_current_snapshot()) and then
>> upload that again to become the active snapshot in another connection.
> Could a hot standby use such a snapshot representation? I.e. same
> snapshot on the master and the standby?
Hm, that's a good question. It seems like it's at least possibly
workable, but I'm not sure if there are any showstoppers. The other
proposal of publish-a-snapshot would presumably NOT support this, since
we'd not want to ship the snapshot temp files down the WAL stream.
However, if you were doing something like parallel pg_dump you could
just run the parent and child instances all against the slave, so the
pg_dump scenario doesn't seem to offer much of a supporting use-case for
worrying about this. When would you really need to be able to do it?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: