From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Erik Jones <erik@myemma.com>
Cc: Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Block size with pg_dump?
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 22:49:41 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <200708270249.l7R2nfX00882@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5539298E-EF2B-4CA2-8BFB-6D8656E05610@myemma.com>
Erik Jones wrote:
> >>> On the way back, likewise I could pipe the tape through dd before
> >>> giving it
> >>> to pg_restore.
> >>>
> >>> Does pg_dump care what blocksize it gets? If so, what is it?
> >>
> >> I assume you could pipe pg_dump into dd and specify the block size in
> >> dd.
> >>
> > Of course on the way out I can do that.
> >
> > The main question is, If I present pg_restore with a 65536-byte
> > blocksize
> > and it is expecting, e.g., 1024-bytes, will the rest of each block get
> > skipped? I.e., do I have to use dd on the way back too? And if so,
> > what
> > should the blocksize be?
>
> Postgres (by default) uses 8K blocks.
That is true of the internal storage, but not of pg_dump's output
because it is using libpq to pull rows and output them in a stream,
meaning there is no blocking in pg_dumps output itself.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, erik@myemma.com, jeandavid8@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Block size with pg_dump?
In-Reply-To: <200708270249.l7R2nfX00882@momjian.us>
* 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