| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Newall <postgresql(at)davidnewall(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump far too slow |
| Date: | 2010-03-16 01:53:10 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071003151853h155a3ebi9623f5929dacd16@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 4:01 AM, David Newall
<postgresql(at)davidnewall(dot)com> wrote:
> an expected 40 - 45GB of compressed output. CPU load is 100% on the core
> executing pg_dump, and negligible on all others cores. The system is
> read-mostly, and largely idle. The exact invocation was:
>
> nohup time pg_dump -f database.dmp -Z9 database
Can you connect a few times with gdb and do "bt" to get a backtrace?
That might shed some light on where it's spending all of its time.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-16 01:58:57 | Re: GiST index performance |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2010-03-16 01:23:53 | Re: Re: [PERFORM] [offtopic] Problems subscribing to Postgres mailing lists |