Message-ID: <508168E5.6020707@optionshouse.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:51:17 -0500
From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>
Reply-To: <sthomas@optionshouse.com>
Organization: Peak6
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>
CC: delongboy <sdelong@saucontech.com>, <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: How to upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2 with replication?
References: <1350598882643-5728941.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<50816749.6010804@denninger.net>
In-Reply-To: <50816749.6010804@denninger.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 10/19/2012 09:44 AM, Karl Denninger wrote:

> For really BIG databases (as opposed to moderately-big) this could be a
> much-more material problem than it is for me.

Which reminds me. I really wish pg_basebackup let you specify an 
alternative compression handler. We've been using pigz on our systems 
because our database is so large. It cuts backup time drastically, from 
about 2.5 hours to 28 minutes.

Until a CPU can compress at the same speed it can read data from disk 
devices, that's going to continue to be a problem. Parallel compression 
is great.

So even after our recent upgrade, we've kept using our home-grown backup 
system. :(

-- 
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-444-8534
sthomas@optionshouse.com

______________________________________________

See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email