Robert Haas wrote:
It's completely possible that you could want to clone a server for dev and have more CPU and I/O bandwidth available than can be efficiently used by a non-parallel pg_dump. But certainly what Joachim is talking about will be a good start. I think there is merit to the synchronized snapshot stuff for pg_dump and perhaps other applications as well, but I think Joachim's (well-taken) point is that we don't have to treat it as a hard prerequisite.
Possibly. I think the most useful thing that could be done right now is probably the least controversial, namely creating a directory type of archive, with support for pg_restore, including parallel pg_restore.
Personally I think that's worth doing in its own right anyway. cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
