Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * daveg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> One observation, indexes should be built right after the table data
>> is loaded for each table, this way, the index build gets a hot cache
>> for the table data instead of having to re-read it later as we do now.
> That's not how pg_dump has traditionally worked, and the point of this
> patch is to add options to easily segregate the main pieces of the
> existing pg_dump output (main schema definition, data dump, key/index
> building). You suggestion brings up an interesting point that should
> pg_dump's traditional output structure change the "--schema-post-load"
> set of objects wouldn't be as clear to newcomers since the load and the
> indexes would be interleaved in the regular output.
Yeah. Also, that is pushing into an entirely different line of
development, which is to enable multithreaded pg_restore. The patch
at hand is necessarily incompatible with that type of operation, and
wouldn't be used together with it.
As far as the documentation/definition aspect goes, I think it should
just say the parts are
* stuff needed before you can load the data
* the data
* stuff needed after loading the data
and not try to be any more specific than that. There are corner cases
that will turn any simple breakdown into a lie, and I doubt that it's
worth trying to explain them all. (Take a close look at the dependency
loop breaking logic in pg_dump if you doubt this.)
I hadn't realized that Simon was using "pre-schema" and "post-schema"
to name the first and third parts. I'd agree that this is confusing
nomenclature: it looks like it's trying to say that the data is the
schema, and the schema is not! How about "pre-data and "post-data"?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
