Re: More efficient pg_restore method?
| От | Evan Bauer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: More efficient pg_restore method? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1F9927D1-5C55-48B9-8C6D-ECE3F6BDA3ED@mac.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | More efficient pg_restore method? (Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: More efficient pg_restore method?
|
| Список | pgsql-admin |
Ron,
A couple of starting questions:
- What is the size and latency of the network pipe between the primary and backup servers?
- What is the size of the database you need to restore?
- Is there a reason not to do a network copy of the backup directory contents to the database server and run the pg_restore locally?
Cheers,
- Evan
On Aug 28, 2018, at 12:48, Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com> wrote:
Pg 9.6.9 on Linux...
Given a backup server storing a "format=directory" database backup, and a database server, should I:
Option #1: run pg_restore on the backup server and "push" the data to the database server via port 5432, or
Option #2: have the backup server serve the dump directory via NFS, and run pg_restore on the database server, pulling the data via nfs protocol?
(It'll be a multi-threaded restore over a 10Gb pipe.)
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: