From: marvin.deoliveira <marvin.deoliveira@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: RESTORE IS TO SLOW
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1316128356637-4808758.post@n5.nabble.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP=oouFe_t5V43pJ194WM+ZgDZ5ySuWWyx8eDro-7hLFaya23A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1316125973378-4808653.post@n5.nabble.com>
<CAP=oouFe_t5V43pJ194WM+ZgDZ5ySuWWyx8eDro-7hLFaya23A@mail.gmail.com>
I'm using postgres 9.0.2 32 bits on Debian 5.
The hardware is a pc with 2 GB RAM, with 2 sata disks. Well, that's what I
have at the moment.
The restore was started like: pg_restore -U postgres --data-only
--disable-triggers -v /bck/<dump file>.sql -d <database>
The pg_restore shows:
pg_restore: disabling triggers for <table name>
pg_restore: restoring data for table "<table name>" <- that's taking more
time that I'd like.
pg_restore: enabling triggers for <table name>
I've read the posts that you send, and saw a lot of things that I didn't do.
I'm pretty sure that I'm going to have much better performance after change
the parameters.
But I still have a doubt: Droping the indexes, could give me more
performance?
-----
Marcos Oliveira
And I still haven't found what I'm looking for...
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/RESTORE-IS-TO-SLOW-tp4808653p4808758.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - admin mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: marvin.deoliveira@gmail.com
Subject: Re: RESTORE IS TO SLOW
In-Reply-To: <1316128356637-4808758.post@n5.nabble.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox