From: | Jasen Betts <jasen(at)xnet(dot)co(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Testing Technique when using a DB |
Date: | 2013-03-16 09:31:08 |
Message-ID: | ki1e4s$d9d$1@gonzo.reversiblemaps.ath.cx |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2013-03-13, Joe Van Dyk <joe(at)tanga(dot)com> wrote:
> --047d7b6226a405604904d7d09001
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steve Crawford <
> scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On 03/12/2013 09:05 PM, Perry Smith wrote:
>>
>>> To all who replied:
>>>
>>> Thank you. ...
>>>
>>>
>>> I had not seriously considered pg_dump / pg_restore because I assumed it
>>> would be fairly slow but I will experiment with pg_restore and template
>>> techniques this weekend and see which ones prove viable.
>>>
>>
>> Another possibility a bit outside my area of expertise but what about a VM
>> image configured to your needs that you just spin up as needed then discard
>> when done (i.e. always spinning up the same starting image)?
>>
>>
> I'd guess the OP is running hundreds of tests, where the data needs to be
> reverted/reset after each test, and each individual test might run in, say,
> 0.1 seconds. This is a really common technique when testing web apps. I
> don't think you'd want to start a VM for each of these tests, especially
> when the tests are small and specific.
A vm rewinds to a snapshot in a few seconds this will likely be faster than
any other way* if the database is large.
*except possibly a similar trick using ZFS snapshots may be faster.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2013-03-16 10:32:25 | Re: Addled index |
Previous Message | Oleg Alexeev | 2013-03-16 08:33:12 | Re: Addled index |