| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Douglas J Hunley <doug(at)hunley(dot)homeip(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? |
| Date: | 2008-02-19 18:22:58 |
| Message-ID: | 19241.1203445378@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> Douglas J Hunley wrote:
>> I spent a whopping seven hours restoring a database late Fri nite for a
> Oh, and have you tweaked the configuration settings for the restore?
> Lots of work_mem, turn fsync off, that sort of thing.
maintenance_work_mem, to be more specific. If that's too small it will
definitely cripple restore speed. I'm not sure fsync would make much
difference, but checkpoint_segments would. See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/populate.html#POPULATE-PG-DUMP
Also: why did you choose -o ... was there a real need to? I can see
that being pretty expensive.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2008-02-19 18:23:23 | Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2008-02-19 18:15:10 | Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? |