Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Jan Lentfer
Subject Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times
Date
Msg-id 7dc008d2afe5d9b9dcfd90a3bb540f98@imap.lan.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times  (Mel Llaguno <mllaguno@coverity.com>)
Responses Re: pg_dump and pg_restore with multiple streams does Not seem to improve overall times
List pgsql-admin
Am 2015-05-04 18:19, schrieb Mel Llaguno:
> My understanding of parallel dump performance is that it only makes a
> difference when you have a large number of DBs (thousands if not tens
> of
> thousands). We performed similar testing using 9.3.x and found little
> performance gains using -j (with 100+ tables). See Bruce Momjian’s
> post :
> http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2012.html

I don't know about parallel pg_dump as we use -Fc and pg_dump can't do
that in parallel (afaik). For dumping I have wrapped pg_dump in a shell
script to dump several databases in parallel.
But for pg_restore -j option does make a big difference, at least when
you have a lot of larger tables and indexes.

Regards,

Jan



pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Marc Fromm
Date:
Subject: Re: migrating to 9.2 created blank dbs
Next
From: Jeff Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: migrating to 9.2 created blank dbs