Re: Backups

From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: <richard(at)scholarpack(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Backups
Date: 2012-03-15 15:30:24
Message-ID: D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C2079CF0BF@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Richard Harley wrote:
> Very simple question - does pg_dump/dumpall hit the server in terms
of database performance? We
> currently do nightly backups and I want to move to hourly backups but
not at the expense of hogging
> all the resources for 5 mins.
>
> Pg_dumpall is currently producing a 1GB file - that's the combined
size of around 30 databases and it
> takes around 5 mins to run.

pg_dump will be a performance hit, because it consumes disk I/O
capacity.
You could measure how the system is affected by your current backup.

On the other hand, instead of doing an hourly pg_dump, it might be
preferable to do a filesystem backup and PITR. That way you have to
do a backup only once a day (or week, depends how much traffic you have
and how fast you have to restore) and can still recover to an
arbitrary point in time.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

  • Backups at 2012-03-15 12:15:58 from Richard Harley

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message George Weaver 2012-03-15 16:17:59 Using copy with a file containing blank rows
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-03-15 14:52:40 Re: Fetch from cursor with indexed sorting