Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore
От | David Wall |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 53B63F1F.7040209@computer.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore (Bosco Rama <postgres@boscorama.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 7/3/2014 10:13 PM, Bosco Rama wrote: > Is the issue with S3 or just transfer time? I would expect that > 'rsync' with the '--partial' option (or -P if you want progress info > too) may help there. Don't know if rsync and S3 work together or what that would mean, but it's not an issue I'm suffering now. I do think they may now have a multipart upload with s3cmd (which I use), though that also wasn't available when we first built our scripts. I suspect nothing is really helping here and I'm mostly limited by disk I/O, but not sure why the pg_dump is so much slower than pg_restore as they are all on the same disks. I say this because even with pg_dump -Z0 | gpg -z 0 and gzip removed entirely and no --oids on pg_dump, there's no effective difference in overall speed. While I can see all of those processes vying for resources via 'top -c', the throughput remains much the same.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: