Re: problems with large objects dump

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Sergio Gabriel Rodriguez <sgrodriguez(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: problems with large objects dump
Date: 2012-09-20 16:33:21
Message-ID: 24248.1348158801@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Sergio Gabriel Rodriguez <sgrodriguez(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> You wouldn't happen to be
>> trying to use a 9.0 or later pg_dump would you? Exactly what 8.4.x
>> release is this, anyway?

> Tom, thanks for replying, yes, we tried it with postgres postgres 9.1 and
> 9.2 and the behavior is exactly the same. The production version is 8.4.9

Well, I see three different fixes for O(N^2) pg_dump performance
problems in the 8.4.x change logs since 8.4.9, so you're a bit behind
the times there. However, all of those fixes would have been in 9.2.0,
so if you saw no improvement with a 9.2.0 pg_dump then the problem is
something else. Can you put together a test case for somebody else to
try, or try to locate the bottleneck yourself using oprofile or perf?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jon Leighton 2012-09-21 10:46:58 Cost of opening and closing an empty transaction
Previous Message Sergio Gabriel Rodriguez 2012-09-20 15:53:10 Re: problems with large objects dump