From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Cea Stapleton <cea@healthfinch.com>
cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, eli@healthfinch.com
Subject: Re: Failing Multi-Job Restores, Missing Indexes on Restore
In-reply-to: <8FBA7790-5E54-4046-B466-C030E4369580@healthfinch.com>
References: <70774A06-3FD9-42D2-BCCB-0CCC8E8D777F@healthfinch.com>
 <4402.1475153551@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <8FBA7790-5E54-4046-B466-C030E4369580@healthfinch.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Cea Stapleton <cea@healthfinch.com>
	message dated "Thu, 29 Sep 2016 07:56:43 -0500"
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:09:16 -0400
Message-ID: <5266.1475154556@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

Cea Stapleton <cea@healthfinch.com> writes:
> We’re using pg_restore (PostgreSQL) 9.5.4 for the restores. We’ve used variations on the job number:
> /usr/bin/pg_restore -j 6 -Fc -O -c -d DBNAME RESTORE_FILE”

OK ... do you actually need the -c, and if so why?

> We’ll take a look at the memory overcommit - would that also explain the index issues we were seeing before we were seeing the crashes?

Unlikely.  I'm guessing that there's some sort of race condition involved
in parallel restore with -c, but it's not very clear what.

			regards, tom lane


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