On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 03:33:42PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 04/23/2013 07:53 PM, Timothy Garnett wrote: > ... > > >Attached is two diffs off of the REL9_2_4 tag that I've been > > >using. The first is a simple change that serially loads the data > > >section before handing off the remainder of the restore to the > > >existing parallelized restore code (the .ALT. diff). The second > > >which gets more parallelization but is a bit more of a change uses > > >the existing dependency analysis code to allow index building etc. > > >to occur in parallel with data loading. The data loading tasks are > > >still performed serially in the main thread, but non-data loading > > >tasks are scheduled in parallel as their dependencies are > > >satisfied (with the caveat that the main thread can only dispatch > > >new tasks between data loads). > ... > > > > > > I don't think these are bad ideas at all, and probably worth doing. > > Note that there are some fairly hefty changes affecting this code in > > master, so your rebasing could be tricky. > > Is there any progress on this: doing parallel pg_restore from a pipe? > > We're on 9.2 and making make extensive use of the patch in the original post. I will probably forward port it to 9.3 when we migrate to that (probably sometime Q1) since we pretty much require it in our setup. Tim
