On 08/26/2018 02:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Ron writes:
On 08/26/2018 01:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Perhaps I don't understand *your* question. What concrete problem are you
having?
I want to track the progress of pg_dump so as to estimate completion time.
Well, if you don't use --jobs then you sho
Ron writes:
> On 08/26/2018 01:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps I don't understand *your* question. What concrete problem are you
>> having?
> I want to track the progress of pg_dump so as to estimate completion time.
Well, if you don't use --jobs then you should get more or less the same
beha
On 08/26/2018 01:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Ron writes:
On 08/26/2018 10:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Ron writes:
In what order does the 9.6 pg_dump dump tables?
I don't believe the ordering rules have changed materially since 8.4;
it's intended to be by object kind, and within that by name, except
Ron writes:
> On 08/26/2018 10:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ron writes:
>>> In what order does the 9.6 pg_dump dump tables?
>> I don't believe the ordering rules have changed materially since 8.4;
>> it's intended to be by object kind, and within that by name, except
>> where dependencies force doi
On 08/26/2018 10:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Ron writes:
In v8.4, I noticed that the tables seemed to be dumped in alphabetical
order. Not so much, though, in a multithreaded 9.6 dump of an 8.4 database;
there's no pattern that I can discern.
In what order does the 9.6 pg_dump dump tables?
I don't
Ron writes:
> In v8.4, I noticed that the tables seemed to be dumped in alphabetical
> order. Not so much, though, in a multithreaded 9.6 dump of an 8.4 database;
> there's no pattern that I can discern.
> In what order does the 9.6 pg_dump dump tables?
I don't believe the ordering rules have
