Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 00:43:18 +0000
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Incidentally, I've been working on a patch to speed up CopyReadLine.
I was going to run some more tests first, but since we're talking
about it, I guess I should just post the patch. I'll post to
pgsql-patches shortly.
On your post to patches you mentioned only about a 5% improvement.
Don't get me wrong, 5% is 5% and I respect it greatly but as far as I
can tell we are about 300% behind the curve.
Yeah. Looking at the profile, the time is spent really all over the
place. There's no one clear bottleneck to focus on. I think we could do
a few more ~5% improvements, but
At some point, I think we have to bite the bullet and find a way to use
multiple CPUs for a single load. I don't have any good ideas or plans
for that, but hopefully someone does.
There was talk elsewhere about making pg_dump/restore smarter. It could
create tables, then COPY, and create the indexes last. Add to that
pg_restore using multiple connections and you'd have it. One connection
could do a COPY, then a second connection could be created to start the
CREATE INDEX's for that table, while the first connection went on to
COPY the next table.
Or something like that...
-Andy
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
