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

Re: bytea vs. pg_dump

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Subject: Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Date: 2009-07-21 20:49:45
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bernd Helmle wrote:
> --On Samstag, Juli 11, 2009 13:40:44 +0300 Peter Eisentraut 
> <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> OK, here is an updated patch.  It has the setting as enum, completed
>> documentation, and libpq support.  I'll add it to the commit fest in the
>> hope  that someone else can look it over in detail.
> I've started looking at this and did some profiling with large bytea 
> data again. For those interested, here are the numbers:
> Dumping with bytea_output=hex (COPY to file):
> real    20m38.699s
> user    0m11.265s
> sys     1m0.560s
> Dumping with bytea_output=escape (COPY to file):
> real    39m52.399s
> user    0m22.085s
> sys     1m50.131s
> So the time needed dropped about 50%. The dump file dropped from 
> around 48 GB to 28 GB with the new format.

You just tested COPY, not pg_dump, right? Some pg_dump numbers would be 
interesting, both for text and custom formats.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dean RasheedDate: 2009-07-21 21:01:26
Subject: Re: WIP: Deferrable unique constraints
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2009-07-21 20:25:19
Subject: Re: pg_listener attribute number #defines

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group