Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: >> However, if you were doing something like parallel pg_dump you could >> just run the parent and child instances all against the slave, so the >> pg_dump scenario doesn't seem to offer much of a supporting use-case for >> worrying about this. When would you really need to be able to do it?
> If you had several standbys, you could distribute the work of the > pg_dump among them. This would be a huge speedup for a large database, > potentially, thanks to parallelization of I/O and network. Imagine > doing a pg_dump of a 300GB database in 10min. That does sound kind of attractive. But to do that I think we'd have to go with the pass-the-snapshot-through-the-client approach. Shipping internal snapshot files through the WAL stream doesn't seem attractive to me. While I see Robert's point about preferring not to expose the snapshot contents to clients, I don't think it outweighs all other considerations here; and every other one is pointing to doing it the other way. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers