Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7289B2E010B for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:24:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19446-04-5 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:24:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649A42E0080 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:23:06 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m1JIMwrV019242; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:22:58 -0500 (EST) To: Richard Huxton cc: Douglas J Hunley , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: 7 hrs for a pg_restore? In-reply-to: <47BB1C51.6010203@archonet.com> References: <200802191303.58840.doug@hunley.homeip.net> <47BB1C51.6010203@archonet.com> Comments: In-reply-to Richard Huxton message dated "Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:13:37 +0000" Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:22:58 -0500 Message-ID: <19241.1203445378@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200802/216 X-Sequence-Number: 28758 Richard Huxton writes: > Douglas J Hunley wrote: >> I spent a whopping seven hours restoring a database late Fri nite for a > Oh, and have you tweaked the configuration settings for the restore? > Lots of work_mem, turn fsync off, that sort of thing. maintenance_work_mem, to be more specific. If that's too small it will definitely cripple restore speed. I'm not sure fsync would make much difference, but checkpoint_segments would. See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/populate.html#POPULATE-PG-DUMP Also: why did you choose -o ... was there a real need to? I can see that being pretty expensive. regards, tom lane