On 2013-03-13, Joe Van Dyk <joe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > --047d7b6226a405604904d7d09001 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Steve Crawford < > scrawford@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
