Re: Block size with pg_dump?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8(at)verizon(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Block size with pg_dump?
Date: 2007-08-27 12:33:25
Message-ID: 200708271233.l7RCXP003515@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> >>> The main question is, If I present pg_restore with a 65536-byte
> >>> blocksize
> >>> and it is expecting, e.g., 1024-bytes, will the rest of each block get
> >>> skipped? I.e., do I have to use dd on the way back too? And if so,
> >>> what
> >>> should the blocksize be?
> >> Postgres (by default) uses 8K blocks.
> >
> > That is true of the internal storage, but not of pg_dump's output
> > because it is using libpq to pull rows and output them in a stream,
> > meaning there is no blocking in pg_dumps output itself.
> >
> Is that true for both input and output (i.e., pg_restore and pg_dump)?
> I.e., can I use dd to write 65536-byte blocks to tape, and then do nothing
> on running pg_restore? I.e., that pg_restore will accept any block size I
> choose to offer it?

Yes.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-08-27 15:07:11 Re: [GENERAL] table column vs. out param [1:0]
Previous Message Jean-David Beyer 2007-08-27 12:28:25 Re: Block size with pg_dump?