From: | William Yu <wyu(at)talisys(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Backup is too slow |
Date: | 2004-12-11 07:45:50 |
Message-ID: | cpe8l2$1nvt$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
John Jensen wrote:
> Hi Greg & others.
> I run this on a 4 cpu smp box (Dell PE6650+EMC AX100) so I already
> offload pg_dump, gzip and split to other cpu's. Top confirms this:
> postmaster = 95% cpu ie. it uses one cpu completely. Unless I can get
> postmaster to do less work (that's what I'm looking for) or run multiple
> threads (not likely) that's about the best I can get.
>
> The job is clearly cpu bound in the postmaster process.
Hmmm, when I upgraded my Opteron box to 64-bit linux, my dump->gzip ran
twice as fast which told me the gzip was a bit part of the CPU usage.
Dunno what else you can do to make it run faster. My backups -- even on
64-bit -- still take 20 minutes on a 30GB DB.
>
> I'm a bit reluctant to go into the snapshot option You outline. It
> looks a bit tricky but if no other options are on hand then I'll have to
> bite the bullet.
Snapshot is much easier if you use LVM. No need to do any postgres
trickery. Just freeze the volume at the kernel level.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Devrim GUNDUZ | 2004-12-11 13:03:45 | Re: postgresql 7.4.1 SRPM |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2004-12-11 05:14:10 | Re: pgcrypto module for WINDOWS |