Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A663CBD.4060202@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bernd Helmle wrote: > --On Dienstag, Juli 21, 2009 16:49:45 -0400 Andrew Dunstan > <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > >> You just tested COPY, not pg_dump, right? Some pg_dump numbers would be >> interesting, both for text and custom formats. > > Plain COPY, yes. I planned testing pg_dump for this round of my review > but ran out of time unfortunately. > > The restore might be limited by xlog (didn't realize that the profile > shows XLogInsert in the top four). I'll try to get some additional > numbers soon, but this won't happen before thursday. > If the table is created by the restore job, either use parallel pg_restore (-j nn) or use the --single-transaction flag - both will ensure that the WAL log is avoided. For plain COPY, get the same effect using: begin; truncat foo; copy foo ... ; commit; All this assumes that archive_mode is off. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: