Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas

From: "Hugo <Nabble>" <hugo(dot)tech(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Date: 2012-05-29 05:21:03
Message-ID: 1338268863476-5710341.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Thanks again for the hard work, guys.

When I said that the schemas were empty, I was talking about data, not
tables. So you are right that each schema has ~20 tables (plus indices,
sequences, etc.), but pretty much no data (maybe one or two rows at most).
Data doesn't seem to be so important in this case (I may be wrong though),
so the sample database should be enough to find the weak spots that need
attention.

> but in the mean time it can be circumvented
> by using -Fc rather than -Fp for the dump format.
> Doing that removed 17 minutes from the run time.

We do use -Fc in our production server, but it doesn't help much (dump time
still > 24 hours). Actually, I tried several different dump options without
success. It seems that you guys are very close to great improvements here.
Thanks for everything!

Best,
Hugo

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/pg-dump-and-thousands-of-schemas-tp5709766p5710341.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2012-05-29 06:16:53 Re: Uh, I change my mind about commit_delay + commit_siblings (sort of)
Previous Message Alex 2012-05-29 04:27:21 Re: libpq URL syntax vs SQLAlchemy

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2012-05-29 09:51:49 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-05-28 22:26:36 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas