Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 09:23:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: jmcdonagh <Joseph.E.McDonagh@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <1414686202058-5825052.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <1414529739004-5824701.post@n5.nabble.com>
References: <1414529739004-5824701.post@n5.nabble.com>
Subject: Re: Incredibly slow restore times after 9.0>9.2 upgrade
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

I just had a thought- I know some of these tables are in need of a vacuuming.
Could it be that the dump is dumping a bunch of garbage that the restore has
to sift through on the restore? I don't know enough details to know if this
is a dumb thought or not.

The restore to RDS took roughly the same amount of time. My next move is to
try on a fast instance store, and also do a postgres 9 restore of a pure SQL
dump, but that won't really be a great test since I use custom format. I'm
assuming here that I can't take the custom dump from 9.2 and apply it to
9.0, or can I?


--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Incredibly-slow-restore-times-after-9-0-9-2-upgrade-tp5824701p5825052.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


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