| From: | Shridhar Daithankar <ghodechhap(at)ghodechhap(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | grupos(at)carvalhaes(dot)net |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] pg_restore taking 4 hours! |
| Date: | 2004-12-01 14:25:23 |
| Message-ID: | 200412011955.23543.ghodechhap@ghodechhap.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
On Wednesday 01 Dec 2004 4:46 pm, Rodrigo Carvalhaes wrote:
> I need to find a solution for this because I am convincing customers
> that are using SQL Server, DB2 and Oracle to change to PostgreSQL but
> this customers have databases of 5GB!!! I am thinking that even with a
> better server, the restore will take 2 days!
>
> My data:
> Conectiva Linux 10 , Kernel 2.6.8
> PostgreSQL 7.4.6.
>
> postgresql.conf modified parameters (the other parameters are the default)
> tcpip_socket = true
> max_connections = 30
> shared_buffers = 30000
> sort_mem = 4096
> vacuum_mem = 8192
> max_fsm_pages = 20000
> max_fsm_relations = 1000
Can you try bumping sort mem lot higher(basically whatever the machine can
afford) so that index creation is faster?
Just try setting sort mem for the restore session and see if it helps..
Shridhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-12-01 14:45:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Adding Reply-To: <listname> to Lists configuration ... |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2004-12-01 14:24:47 | Re: "PoastgreSQL/SQLite Anywhere"? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Riccardo G. Facchini | 2004-12-01 15:19:17 | Re: [PERFORM] pg_restore taking 4 hours! |
| Previous Message | George Woodring | 2004-12-01 13:29:55 | Re: Query Performance and IOWait |