Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Date: 2008-02-21 18:09:32
Message-ID: 13059.1203617372@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch> writes:
> I have made a comparison restoring a production dump with default
> and large maintenance_work_mem. The speedup improvement here is
> only of 5% (12'30 => 11'50).

> Apprently, on the restored database, data is 1337 MB[1] and
> indexes 644 MB[2][2]. Pg is 8.2.3, checkpoint_segments 3,
> maintenance_work_mem default (16MB) then 512MB, shared_buffers
> 384MB. It is rather slow disks (Dell's LSI Logic RAID1), hdparm
> reports 82 MB/sec for reads.

The main thing that jumps out at me is that boosting checkpoint_segments
would probably help.  I tend to set it to 30 or so (note that this
corresponds to about 1GB taken up by pg_xlog).

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Vivek KheraDate: 2008-02-21 19:17:40
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Previous:From: Guillaume CottenceauDate: 2008-02-21 17:28:58
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group