| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | joe(dot)mcclintock(at)antics(dot)com | 
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Very Very Slow Database Restore | 
| Date: | 2006-12-21 05:47:44 | 
| Message-ID: | 14149.1166680064@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin | 
Joseph McClintock <joe(dot)mcclintock(at)antics(dot)com> writes:
> Now our database has grown and the pg_dump give me a 2.1 GB file which
> is taking 12 hours or more to restore, Yickes! I've tried compressing
> the dump file:
Compressing the dump file will make the restore slower, most likely,
because of the extra CPU effort to decompress.  It certainly won't
create any great savings.
> The database configuration is pretty much out of the box.
You probably want to increase maintenance_work_mem (to speed index
creation) and checkpoint_segments (general rule for any update-intensive
situation) ... and for 8.0 you'd maybe need larger shared_buffers etc.
The postgresql techdocs website has lots of general advice about
parameter settings --- the only thing specific to restore is you
want high maintenance_work_mem.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sandy Spence | 2006-12-21 10:26:29 | Trigger trouble | 
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2006-12-20 21:10:49 | Re: Upgrading from 7.4 to 8.2 |