On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 04:46:48PM +0200, Joachim Wieland wrote: > People have been talking about a parallel version of pg_dump a few > times already. I have been working on some proof-of-concept code for > this feature every now and then and I am planning to contribute this > for 9.1. > > There are two main issues with a parallel version of pg_dump: > > The first one is that it requires a consistent snapshot among > multiple pg_dump clients
Cloning snapshots seems like the way to fix this. I don't know how far this project has drifted from the PostgreSQL code, but you might want to look here: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/snapclone/ > and the second is that currently the output goes to a single file > and it is unclear what to do about multiple processes writing into a > single file. I don't think that's a good idea. Coming up with a directory structure for the new parallel pg_dump seems like a much better idea. Andrew, do you have some notes on this? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
