Re: bytea vs. pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bernd Helmle
Subject Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Date
Msg-id 6A9D2E5442CE71DC2A7190F4@teje
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: bytea vs. pg_dump  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: bytea vs. pg_dump  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
--On Dienstag, Juli 21, 2009 16:49:45 -0400 Andrew Dunstan 
<andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:

> You just tested COPY, not pg_dump, right? Some pg_dump numbers would be
> interesting, both for text and custom formats.

Plain COPY, yes. I planned testing pg_dump for this round of my review but 
ran out of time unfortunately.

The restore might be limited by xlog (didn't realize that the profile shows 
XLogInsert in  the top four). I'll try to get some additional numbers soon, 
but this won't happen before thursday.

--  Thanks
                   Bernd


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Deferrable unique constraints
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_restore --clean vs. large object