Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Re: [HACKERS] parallel pg_restore

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:44:19 +0100
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:05 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > j and m happen to be two of those that are available.
> >
> > I honestly don't have a terribly strong opinion about what it
> > should be called. I can live with jobs or multi-threads.
> Perhaps we can use -j for jobs and -m for memory, so we can set memory
> available across all threads with a single total value.
> I can live with jobs or multi-threads also, whichever we decide.
> Neither one is confusing to explain.

Memory? Where did that come from. Andrew is that in your spec?

Joshua D. Drake

The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

No comments: