From: | Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8(at)verizon(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Block size with pg_dump? |
Date: | 2007-08-26 21:35:15 |
Message-ID: | 46D1F213.4010107@verizon.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
When I make a backup of a database, I put the output file directly on
magnetic tape; i.e., my command looks like this:
pg_dump --file=/dev/st0 ....
This way I do not have to worry if the total backup exceeds the size of a
file system, and it saves me the trouble of copying it to the tape as a
separate step. My current tapes will hold 20 GBytes raw or 40GBytes if I
enable hardware compression (assuming 2:1 compression happens). Now it says
in the documentation that if I use format c it will compress the data in
software, so I doubt the hardware compression will do much.
I do not know what blocksize pg_dump uses, or if it insists on a particular
blocksize on input.
Now my tape drive will work with any blocksize, but prefers 65536-byte
blocks. I do not see any options for this in pg_dump, but I could pipe the
output of pg_dump through dd I suppose to make any blocksize I want.
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?
- --
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 17:20:01 up 17 days, 20:42, 5 users, load average: 5.12, 5.26, 5.21
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with CentOS - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG0fITPtu2XpovyZoRAouwAKCTEour7jbi3uKWmEjerOM3U51xKQCeKYrQ
6jbamlqvTvH04jD7oRbTAKY=
=piNw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas | 2007-08-26 23:35:50 | List of FKeys ? |
Previous Message | Andreas Joseph Krogh | 2007-08-25 22:42:56 | Re: Returning array of IDs as a sub-query with group-by |