On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié mar 28 14:46:30 -0300 2012: >> I keep hoping someone who knows Windows is going to take a look at >> this, but so far no luck. It could also really use some attention >> from someone who has an actual really big database handy, to see how >> successful it is in reducing the dump time. Without those things, I >> can't see this getting committed. But in the meantime, a few fairly >> minor comments based on reading the code. > > My main comment about the current patch is that it looks like it's > touching pg_restore parallel code by moving some stuff into parallel.c. > If that's really the case and its voluminous, maybe this patch would > shrink a bit if we could do the code moving in a first patch. That > would be mostly mechanical. Then the interesting stuff would apply on > top of that. That would make review easier.
+1. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
