From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andras Fabian <Fabian(at)atrada(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PG_DUMP very slow because of STDOUT ?? |
Date: | 2010-07-09 20:11:29 |
Message-ID: | 4C378271.9000906@postnewspapers.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 09/07/10 22:08, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andras Fabian <Fabian(at)atrada(dot)net> writes:
>>> Something weird about the network stack on the new machine, maybe.
>>> Have you compared the transfer speeds for Unix-socket and TCP connections?
>
>> Hmm, no ... but how do Unix-socket / TCP connections relate to STDOUT here (sorry, maybe this is obvious to some, but not to me at the moment)?
>
> Well, COPY TO STDOUT really means "send the data across the network
> connection to the client". It sounds to me like your problem is slow
> data transfer between the database backend and pg_dump (or psql).
> Not sure what could be causing it, unless perhaps you've got a kernel
> packet filter that's performing an unreasonable amount of processing
> per packet.
... and that should be showing up as high "system" CPU time, or it seems
to on my machines with lots of tcp/ip traffic and heavy netfilter rules.
If they're using unix sockets packet filtering shouldn't come into play
anyway.
Andrais: Are you using UNIX sockets or TCP/IP to connect to PostgreSQL?
If you specify any host to connect to, even "localhost", you're using
TCP/IP. If you don't specify a host, you're using unix sockets.
Whichever you are doing, try the other one and see if performance is
different.
Idea: One notable difference between COPY to file and 'copy to stdout"
to a receiving process over the network is that the latter involves the
interaction of two processes. When a kernel change is involved and
you're seeing low performance with lots of apparent idleness, that
immediately makes me think "process scheduler".
Of course, that might be completely off-track, but I've seen weird
performance issues caused by scheduler changes before.
--
Craig Ringer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andras Fabian | 2010-07-09 20:25:49 | Re: PG_DUMP very slow because of STDOUT ?? |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2010-07-09 20:00:29 | Re: JDBC Postgres problem |