Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: More efficient pg_restore method? - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Evan Bauer
Subject Re: More efficient pg_restore method?
Date
Msg-id 1F9927D1-5C55-48B9-8C6D-ECE3F6BDA3ED@mac.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to More efficient pg_restore method?  (Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: More efficient pg_restore method?  (Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-admin
Tree view
Ron,

A couple of starting questions:

  1. What is the size and latency of the network pipe between the primary and backup servers?  
  2. What is the size of the database you need to restore? 
  3. Is there a reason not to do a network copy of the backup directory contents to the database server and run the pg_restore locally?

Cheers,

- Evan

Evan Bauer
eb@evanbauer.com
+1 646 641 2973
Skype: evanbauer


On Aug 28, 2018, at 12:48, Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com> wrote:


Pg 9.6.9 on Linux...

Given a backup server storing a "format=directory" database backup, and a database server, should I:

Option #1: run pg_restore on the backup server and "push" the data to the database server via port 5432, or
Option #2: have the backup server serve the dump directory via NFS, and run pg_restore on the database server, pulling the data via nfs protocol?

(It'll be a multi-threaded restore over a 10Gb pipe.)

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: wambacher@posteo.de
Date:
Subject: Re: tuple concurrently updated
Next
From: Ron
Date:
Subject: Re: More efficient pg_restore method?