Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Hannu Krosing |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CAMT0RQQr7KtPAY903+F42csiHc1EPHo70Xji-znkxEhwdoKa6w@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump (Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump
|
| List | pgsql-hackers |
Ran another test with a 53GB database where most of the data is in TOAST CREATE TABLE just_toasted( id serial primary key, toasted1 char(2200) STORAGE EXTERNAL, toasted2 char(2200) STORAGE EXTERNAL, toasted3 char(2200) STORAGE EXTERNAL, toasted4 char(2200) STORAGE EXTERNAL ); and the toast fields were added in somewhat randomised order. Here the results are as follows Parallelism | chunk size (pages) | time (sec) 1 | - | 240 2 | 1000 | 129 4 | 1000 | 64 8 | 1000 | 36 16 | 1000 | 30 4 | 9095 | 78 8 | 9095 | 42 16 | 9095 | 42 The reason larger chunk sizes performed worse was that they often had one or two stragglers left behind which Detailed run results below: hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres -f /tmp/ltoastdb-1-plain.dump largetoastdb real 3m59.465s user 3m43.304s sys 0m15.844s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=9095 -j 4 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-4.dump largetoastdb real 1m18.320s user 3m49.236s sys 0m19.422s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=9095 -j 8 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-8.dump largetoastdb real 0m42.028s user 3m55.299s sys 0m24.657s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=9095 -j 16 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-16.dump largetoastdb real 0m42.575s user 4m11.011s sys 0m26.110s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=1000 -j 16 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-16-1kpages.dump largetoastdb real 0m29.641s user 6m16.321s sys 0m49.345s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=1000 -j 8 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-8-1kpages.dump largetoastdb real 0m35.685s user 3m58.528s sys 0m26.729s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=1000 -j 4 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-4-1kpages.dump largetoastdb real 1m3.737s user 3m50.251s sys 0m18.507s hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres --huge-table-chunk-pages=1000 -j 2 -f /tmp/ltoastdb-2-1kpages.dump largetoastdb real 2m8.708s user 3m57.018s sys 0m18.499s On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 7:39 PM Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com> wrote: > > Going up to 16 workers did not improve performance , but this is > expected, as the disk behind the database can only do 4TB/hour of > reads, which is now the bottleneck. (408/352/*3600 = 4172 GB/h) > > $ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres > --huge-table-chunk-pages=131072 -j 16 -f /tmp/parallel16.dump largedb > real 5m44.900s > user 53m50.491s > sys 5m47.602s > > And 4 workers showed near-linear speedup from single worker > > hannuk@pgn2:~/work/postgres/src/bin/pg_dump$ time ./pg_dump > --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres > --huge-table-chunk-pages=131072 -j 4 -f /tmp/parallel4.dump largedb > real 10m32.074s > user 38m54.436s > sys 2m58.216s > > The database runs on a 64vCPU VM with 128GB RAM, so most of the table > will be read in from the disk > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 7:02 PM Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com> wrote: > > > > I just ran a test by generating a 408GB table and then dumping it both ways > > > > $ time pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres -f > > /tmp/plain.dump largedb > > > > real 39m54.968s > > user 37m21.557s > > sys 2m32.422s > > > > $ time ./pg_dump --format=directory -h 10.58.80.2 -U postgres > > --huge-table-chunk-pages=131072 -j 8 -f /tmp/parallel8.dump largedb > > > > real 5m52.965s > > user 40m27.284s > > sys 3m53.339s > > > > So parallel dump with 8 workers using 1GB (128k pages) chunks runs > > almost 7 times faster than the sequential dump. > > > > this was a table that had no TOAST part. I will run some more tests > > with TOASTed tables next and expect similar or better improvements. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 1:59 PM Ashutosh Bapat > > <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Hannu, > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 9:00 PM Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Attached is a patch that adds the ability to dump table data in multiple chunks. > > > > > > > > Looking for feedback at this point: > > > > 1) what have I missed > > > > 2) should I implement something to avoid single-page chunks > > > > > > > > The flag --huge-table-chunk-pages which tells the directory format > > > > dump to dump tables where the main fork has more pages than this in > > > > multiple chunks of given number of pages, > > > > > > > > The main use case is speeding up parallel dumps in case of one or a > > > > small number of HUGE tables so parts of these can be dumped in > > > > parallel. > > > > > > Have you measured speed up? Can you please share the numbers? > > > > > > -- > > > Best Wishes, > > > Ashutosh Bapat
pgsql-hackers by date: