On Thu, 20 Mar 2025, Tom Lane wrote:
> I am betting that the problem is that the dump's TOC (table of
> contents) lacks offsets to the actual data of the database objects,
> and thus the readers have to reconstruct that information by scanning
> the dump file. Normally, pg_dump will back-fill offset data in the
> TOC at completion of the dump, but if it's told to write to an
> un-seekable output file then it cannot do that.
Thanks Tom, this makes sense! As you noticed, I'm piping the output, and
this was a conscious choice.
> I don't see an easy way, and certainly no way that wouldn't involve
> redefining the archive format. Can you write the dump to a local
> file rather than piping it immediately?
Unfortunately I don't have enough space for that. I'm still testing, but
the way this is designed to work is to take an uncompressed pg_dump
(unlike the above which was compressed for testing purposes) and send it
to a backup server having its own deduplication and compression.
Further questions:
* Does the same happen in an uncompressed dump? Or maybe the offsets are
pre-filled because they are predictable without compression?
* Should pg_dump print some warning for generating a lower quality format?
* The seeking pattern in pg_restore seems non-sensical to me: reading 4K,
jumping 8-12K, repeat for the whole file? Consuming 15K IOPS for an
hour. /Maybe/ something to improve there... Where can I read more about
the format?
* Why doesn't it happen in single-process pg_restore?
Thank you!
Dimitris
