multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
Date
Msg-id 20080226151718.18c66011@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:43:23 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:25:09 -0800
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> 
> 24 connections: 3.5 hours
> 12 connections: 4.5 hours
> 

24 connections RAW_BUF_SIZE 524288 3.5 hours

However one observation that I am going to (try) to test is that we are
spending a lot of time waiting for the last thread to finish. I
wouldn't be surprised if I could cut the time in half if I could script
this out to do:

table.data->table.pk->table.index
table.data->table.pk->table.index
table.data->table.pk->table.index
table.data->table.pk->table.index
constraints

versus

table.data
table.data
table.data
table.pk
table.pk
table.pk
table.index

...

Joshua D. Drake


- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHxJ3+ATb/zqfZUUQRAlURAKCtOSbHoWTNSkzV0U48Ib0P/8SSNgCdFeWK
v6Q1l5BBGxqqtPu1UMhA81E=
=VA2+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Mailing list failure WAS: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-worker pg_restore was: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison