pg.ddx.io  pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Llaguno <mllaguno@coverity.com>
To: Jan Lentfer <Jan.Lentfer@web.de>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times
Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 16:19:36 +0000
Message-ID: <D16CF6D3.369FE%mllaguno@coverity.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a37a287dd1d3a528f0d3a2a8b529f2a0@imap.lan.net>
References: <em5e30e63a-661c-44ad-8996-601c945efc8b@oyster-creek>
	<a37a287dd1d3a528f0d3a2a8b529f2a0@imap.lan.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-admin>

My understanding of parallel dump performance is that it only makes a
difference when you have a large number of DBs (thousands if not tens of
thousands). We performed similar testing using 9.3.x and found little
performance gains using -j (with 100+ tables). See Bruce Momjian’s post :
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2012.html

Mel Llaguno • Staff Engineer – Team Lead
Office: +1.403.264.9717 x3310
www.coverity.com <http://www.coverity.com/; • Twitter: @coverity


On 5/4/15, 6:17 AM, "Jan Lentfer" <Jan.Lentfer@web.de> wrote:

>Am 2015-05-01 17:16, schrieb Susan K. McClure:
>
>[...]
>> My postgresql.conf has these options for (hopefully) pg_dump and
>> pg_restore improvements:
>>
>> =================
>> work_mem = 1GB # dump/restore Perf Value
>> #maintenance_work_mem = 2048MB # min 1MB
>> maintenance_work_mem = 1GB # dump/restore Perf Value
>> #autovacuum_work_mem = -1 # min 1MB, or -1 to use
>> maintenance_work_mem
>>
>> ...
>> fsync = off # dump/restore Perf Valuecheckpoint_segments = 60 #
>> dump/restore Perf Value
>> checkpoint_warning = 60s # dump/restore Perf Value
>> ......
>> autovacuum = off # dump/restore Perf Value..
>> =============================
>>
>> Any thoughts on what else I might try to improve things ?
>[...]
>
>It ist more interesting to know how your database schema is. How many
>"large" tables do you have. What is e.g. the size of your 10,20,30
>largest tables?
>
>Regards
>
>Jan
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
>To make changes to your subscription:
>http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin


-- 
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin


view thread (12+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <D16CF6D3.369FE%mllaguno@coverity.com>
Permalink:  ../D16CF6D3.369FE%25mllaguno@coverity.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/D16CF6D3.369FE%mllaguno@coverity.com

 · 

reply

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: mllaguno@coverity.com, Jan.Lentfer@web.de
  Subject: Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times
  In-Reply-To: <D16CF6D3.369FE%mllaguno@coverity.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