On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 09:18:29PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Simon Riggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 17:43 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > Even this doesn't cover everything though- it's too focused on tables > > > and data loading. Where do functions go? What about types? > > > > Yes, it is focused on tables and data loading. What about > > functions/types? No relevance here. > > I don't see how they're not relevant, it's not like they're being > excluded and in fact they show up in the pre-load output. Heck, even if > they *were* excluded, that should be made clear in the documentation > (either be an explicit include list, or saying they're excluded). > > Part of what's driving this is making sure we have a plan for future > objects and where they'll go. Perhaps it would be enough to just say > "pre-load is everything in the schema, except things which are faster > done in bulk (eg: indexes, keys)". I don't think it's right to say > pre-load is "only object definitions required to load data" when it > includes functions and ACLs though. > > Hopefully my suggestion and these comments will get us to a happy > middle-ground.
One observation, indexes should be built right after the table data is loaded for each table, this way, the index build gets a hot cache for the table data instead of having to re-read it later as we do now. -dg -- David Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510 536 1443 510 282 0869 If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects. -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
