| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Vladimir Borodin <root(at)simply(dot)name>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dinesh Chandra 12108 <Dinesh(dot)Chandra(at)cyient(dot)com>, Madusudanan(dot)B(dot)N <b(dot)n(dot)madusudanan(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Backup taking long time !!! |
| Date: | 2017-01-23 15:31:29 |
| Message-ID: | 1ddb6452-b5c0-9ee7-7f76-cdca5563a60b@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 1/23/17 9:27 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> If you want my 2c on that, running with BLKSZ <> 8192 is playing with
> fire, or at least running with scissors.
I've never seen it myself, but I'm under the impression that it's not
unheard of for OLAP environments. Given how sensitive PG is to IO
latency a larger block size could theoretically mean a big performance
improvement in some scenarios.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gabriel Dodan | 2017-01-23 16:55:04 | performance contradiction |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2017-01-23 15:28:34 | Re: Backup taking long time !!! |