Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442BB688594 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:51:58 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09304-07 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:51:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mailhub1.renesys.com (mailhub1.ep.renesys.com [195.160.236.248]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC09688592 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:51:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from ops05.psm1.renesys.com (ops05.psm1.renesys.com [10.200.1.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailhub1.renesys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2730671F2; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:51:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from rouilj@localhost) by ops05.psm1.renesys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id o5MFpnei021647; Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:51:49 GMT Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:51:49 +0000 From: John Rouillard To: Igor Neyman Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: parallel option in pg_restore Message-ID: <20100622155149.GO703@renesys.com> References: <1319.1277217422@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.011 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_40=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201006/164 X-Sequence-Number: 34942 On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:05:02AM -0400, Igor Neyman wrote: > > "Igor Neyman" writes: > > > I'm testing 8.4.4 (on Windows) before upgrading our app to this PG > > > version. > > > When running pg_restore with "-j 2" parallel option, I'm getting the > > > following error: > > > "pg_restore: [custom archiver] dumping a specific TOC data block out > > > of order is not supported without ID on this input stream > > > (fseek required)" > > > > We have gotten several reports of this, but none of the > > developers have been able to reproduce it. Can you provide > > an exact test case? > > regards, tom lane > Backup files I'm trying to restore "in parallel" contain partitions of > several partitioned tables. > Tables partitioned "by month", each backup file contains 1 month worth > of data for all partitioned tables. > > Before restoring backed up partitions, I'm restoring from another backup > file (not using "-j"), which contains "base" (empty) tables, from which > partitions inherited. And this restore runs fine. I realise this may be a silly question (especially for windows), but the fseek complaint has me wondering. Are you running a pipleine reatore? E.G: type dumpfile | pg_restore -j 2 or are you running: pg_restore -j 2 dumpfile in the latter case it should be fseekable, but in the former case I don't think you can fseek stdin on either windows or *nix.. -- -- rouilj John Rouillard System Administrator Renesys Corporation 603-244-9084 (cell) 603-643-9300 x 111