On 7/30/09 11:14 AM, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> Since the dump to custom format ran longer than the full pg_dump >>> piped directly to psql would have taken, the overall time to use >>> this technique is clearly longer for our databases on our hardware. >> >> Hmmm ... AFAIR there isn't a good reason for dump to custom format >> to take longer than plain text dump, except for applying >> compression. Maybe -Z0 would be worth testing? Or is the problem >> that you have to write the data to a disk file rather than just >> piping it? > > I did some checking with the DBA who normally copies these around for > development and test environments. He confirmed that when the source > and target are on the same machine, a pg_dump piped to psql takes > about two hours. If he pipes across the network, it runs more like > three hours. > > My pg_dump to custom format ran for six hours. The single-transaction > restore from that dump file took two hours, with both on the same > machine. I can confirm with benchmarks, but this guy generally knows > what he's talking about (and we do create a lot of development and > test databases this way). > > Either the compression is tripling the dump time, or there is > something inefficient about how pg_dump writes to the disk. > > All of this is on a RAID 5 array with 5 drives using xfs with > noatime,nobarrier and a 256MB BBU controller. > Of course Compression has a HUGE effect if your I/O system is half-decent. Max GZIP compression speed with the newest Intel CPU's is something like 50MB/sec (it is data dependant, obviously -- it is usually closer to 30MB/sec). Max gzip decompression ranges from 50 to 150MB/sec (it can get really high only if the ratio is extremely large, like if you compress a repeating sequence of 256 bytes). The new parallel restore is nice and all, but we're still limited by the week it takes to dump the whole thing compressed. Parallel restore is a lot faster when restoring compressed dumps though, even without any indexes to make, since all that decompression is CPU hungry. > -Kevin > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
