Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bosco Rama
Subject Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore
Date
Msg-id 53B5948A.7080800@boscorama.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to pg_dump slower than pg_restore  (David Wall <d.wall@computer.org>)
Responses Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore  (Tim Clarke <tim.clarke@manifest.co.uk>)
Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore  (David Wall <d.wall@computer.org>)
List pgsql-general
On 07/03/14 10:04, David Wall wrote:
>
> A pg_dump backup -- with most of the data stored as large objects --
> takes about 5 hours.

If those large objects are 'files' that are already compressed (e.g.
most image files and pdf's) you are spending a lot of time trying to
compress the compressed data ... and failing.

Try setting the compression factor to an intermediate value, or even
zero (i.e. no dump compression).  For example, to get the 'low hanging
fruit' compressed:
    $ pg_dump -Z1 -Fc ...

IIRC, the default value of '-Z' is 6.

As usual your choice will be a run-time vs file-size trade-off so try
several values for '-Z' and see what works best for you.

HTH,
Bosco.


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: David Wall
Date:
Subject: pg_dump slower than pg_restore
Next
From: Tim Clarke
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore