| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel pg_dump for 9.1 |
| Date: | 2010-03-30 12:15:34 |
| Message-ID: | 4BB1EB66.4000006@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2010-03-30 at 08:39 +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> on fast systems pg_dump is completely CPU bottlenecked
>
> Might be useful to profile why that is. I don't think pg_dump has
> historically been developed with CPU efficiency in mind.
It's not pg_dump that is the problem - it is COPY that is the limit. In
my specific case als the fact that a lot of the columns are bytea adds
to the horrible CPU overhead (fixed in 9.0). Still our bulk load &
unload performance is still way slower on a per core comparision than a
lot of other databases :(
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-03-30 12:33:03 | keep ppport.h in sync on all branches |
| Previous Message | Pierre C | 2010-03-30 11:56:45 | Re: Parallel pg_dump for 9.1 |