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

Re: pg_dump & performance degradation

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, brianb-pggeneral(at)edsamail(dot)com
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Date: 2000-08-01 13:05:53
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000801060553.013e2ca0@mail.pacifier.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
At 02:31 PM 8/1/00 +1000, Philip Warner wrote:

>>Have you tried pg_dump on a multi-processor machine, which most serious
>>database-backed websites run on these days?   Do you see the same
performance
>>degradation?  My site runs on a dual P450 with RAID 1 LVD disks, and cost
>>me exactly $2100 to build (would've been less if I'd laid off the extra
>>cooling fans!)
>
>The original request came from a person with a "4-CPU Xeon with 2GB of
>RAM", but the "solution" does not seem to work for them (I think), so it's
>probably a waste of time.

It seems really strange that pg_dump could suck the guts out of a
four-processor
machine.  What kind of device were they backing up to?   Disk?





- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
  Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
  http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 13:37:04
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 13:02:26
Subject: pg_dump & ownership (again)

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: abeDate: 2000-08-01 13:19:22
Subject: Someone Needed!!
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-08-01 12:46:38
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation

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