Re: pg_dump / pg_dumpall / memory issues
От | Ericson Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump / pg_dumpall / memory issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3E9504D8.90504@did-it.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump / pg_dumpall / memory issues ("scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump / pg_dumpall / memory issues
Re: pg_dump / pg_dumpall / memory issues |
Список | pgsql-general |
We're running the 7.3 series. We are getting better backup performance than 7.2 indeed. Looking at pg_dump.c -- it seems to use the COPY command so perhaps throttling in the code may not be the best solution. I did see the notes about this that Tom mentioned. > So I'm wondering if the simple solution might be to either use a slower > box / network connection / throttled port on the backup box, or just > backup into another database since the copies into the other machine > probably slow things down enough to render less of a load on the server > being backed up. Hmmm... that might be an interesting solution. We do have a slower standby DB, that would be excellent for that purpose. It would be an added incentive too, because the standby DB would be hot after backup. I'm gonna give this a shot and report back. I guess we can do a pg_dumpall from the standby DB as soon as the main DB has finished backing up too! Regards - Ericson Smith eric@did-it.com scott.marlowe wrote: >What version of pgsql are you running? I've gotten MUCH better backup >restore performance on 7.3 series than I did with 7.2. I can backup 1 gig >of data in about 10 minutes across 100 Base Tx network with a pipe like >so: > >pg_dump -h hostname databasename | psql databasename > >It took something like 30 minutes to an hour before to do this in 7.2.x. > >(My box is a dual PIII 750 with 1.5 gig ram, and a 10KRPM UWScsi drive for >the database seperate from the system.) > > > > >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: