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: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
Cc: Douglas J Hunley <doug(at)hunley(dot)homeip(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Date: 2008-02-19 18:22:58
Message-ID: 19241.1203445378@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> Douglas J Hunley wrote:
>> I spent a whopping seven hours restoring a database late Fri nite for a 

> Oh, and have you tweaked the configuration settings for the restore? 
> Lots of work_mem, turn fsync off, that sort of thing.

maintenance_work_mem, to be more specific.  If that's too small it will
definitely cripple restore speed.  I'm not sure fsync would make much
difference, but checkpoint_segments would.  See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/populate.html#POPULATE-PG-DUMP

Also: why did you choose -o ... was there a real need to?  I can see
that being pretty expensive.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2008-02-19 18:23:23
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?
Previous:From: Dave CramerDate: 2008-02-19 18:15:10
Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore?

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