| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | "Greg Smith" <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "KaiGai Kohei" <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "KaiGai Kohei" <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, "Takahiro Itagaki" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec> |
| Subject: | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
| Date: | 2010-01-25 19:46:25 |
| Message-ID: | 901.1264448785@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Did you happen to notice anything about pg_dump's memory
>>> consumption?
> I took a closer look, and there's some bad news, I think. The above
> numbers were from the ends of the range. I've gone back over and
> found that while it dropped about 2.1 GB almost immediately, cache
> usage slowly dropped throughout the dump, and bottomed at about 6.9
> GB below baseline.
OK, that's still not very scary --- it just means my off-the-cuff
estimate of 1:1 space usage was bad. 3:1 isn't that surprising either
given padding and other issues. The representation of ArchiveEntries
could probably be made a bit more compact ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo | 2010-01-25 19:50:51 | C function accepting/returning cstring vs. text |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-01-25 19:45:25 | Re: Review: Typed Table |