Re: pg_dump & performance degradation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, brianb-pggeneral(at)edsamail(dot)com
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Date: 2000-07-28 16:22:37
Message-ID: 258.964801357@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Brian Baquiran in the [GENERAL] list recently asked if it was possible to
> 'throttle-down' pg_dump so that it did not cause an IO bottleneck when
> copying large tables.

> Can anyone see a reason not to pause periodically?

Because it'd slow things down?

As long as the default behavior is "no pauses", I have no strong
objection.

> Finally, can anyone point me to the most portable subsecond timer routines?

You do not want a timer routine, you want a delay. I think using a
dummy select() with a timeout parameter might be the most portable way.
Anyway we've used it for a long time --- see the spinlock backoff code
in s_lock.c.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Keith G. Murphy 2000-07-28 16:48:10 Re: Re: 4 billion record limit?
Previous Message Matthew 2000-07-28 15:55:07 RE: Backup/dump of huge tables and performance

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-07-28 16:25:18 Re: Security choices...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-07-28 15:59:42 Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c