From: Eric Lam <elam@lisasoft.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Slow restoration question
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 09:07:25 +0930
Message-ID: <44554A35.7060308@lisasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6110.1146342203@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <444F24E9.2010907@lisasoft.com>
<6110.1146342203@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
>Eric Lam <elam@lisasoft.com> writes:
>
>
>>what is the quickest way of dumping a DB and restoring it? I have done a
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> "pg_dump -D database | split --line-bytes 1546m part"
>>
>>
>
>Don't use "-D" if you want fast restore ...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
thanks, I read that from the doco, the reason why I am using the -D
option is because I was informed by previous people in the company that
they never got a 100% strike rate in database restoration without using
the -D or -d options. If I have enough space on the QA/staging machine
I'll give the no options dump restoration a try.
Anyone have any estimates the time differences between the -D, -d and
[using no option].
regards
Eric Lam
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: elam@lisasoft.com
Subject: Re: Slow restoration question
In-Reply-To: <44554A35.7060308@lisasoft.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