On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> But in the 9.2 branch, the slow phenotype was re-introduced in
>> 1575fbcb795fc331f4, although perhaps the details of who is locking
>> what differs. I haven't yet sorted that out.
>
> It
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> But in the 9.2 branch, the slow phenotype was re-introduced in
> 1575fbcb795fc331f4, although perhaps the details of who is locking
> what differs. I haven't yet sorted that out.
It very much does. That commit prevents people from creating a
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>> There was a regression introduced in 9.2 that effects the creation and
>>> loading of lots of small tables in a single transaction.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> There was a regression introduced in 9.2 that effects the creation and
>> loading of lots of small tables in a single transaction.
>>
>> It affects the loading of a pg_dump file which has a
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> There was a regression introduced in 9.2 that effects the creation and
> loading of lots of small tables in a single transaction.
>
> It affects the loading of a pg_dump file which has a large number of
> small tables (10,000 schemas, one table
There was a regression introduced in 9.2 that effects the creation and
loading of lots of small tables in a single transaction.
It affects the loading of a pg_dump file which has a large number of
small tables (10,000 schemas, one table per schema, 10 rows per
table). I did not test other schema
