On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 5:28 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 09:35:27AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 01:52:40PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> Another option that I think would also work is to just cut down the > details > >> to just "The <option>--jobs</option> option allows multiple CPU cores > to be > >> used". > > > > That's fine with me. It's probably not particularly actionable > > information, anyway. If anything, IMHO we should make it clear to users > > that the parallelization is per-database (except for file transfer, which > > is per-tablespace). If you've just got one big database in the default > > tablespace, --jobs won't help. > > > >> I think this is also slightly confusing, but maybe that's a > >> non-native-english thing: "a good place to start is the maximum of the > >> number of CPU cores and tablespaces.". Am I supposed to set it to > >> max(cpucores, ntablespaces) or to max(cpucores+ntablespaces)? > > > > I've always read it to mean the former. But I'm not sure that's great > > advice. If you have 8 cores and 100 tablespaces, does it make sense to > use > > --jobs=100? Ordinarily, I'd suggest the number of cores as the starting > > point. > > Here's another attempt at the patch based on the latest discussion. > LGTM! -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
