Re: parallel pg_restore

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 22:17 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 16:50 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > 
> >> If we get all that done by November we'll have done well. And we know 
> >> that in some cases just this much can lead to reductions in restore
> >> time 
> >> of the order of 80%.
> > 
> > Agreed. Go for it.

> Just as an FYI, by far the number one bottle neck on the multiple work 
> restores I was doing was CPU. RAM and IO were never the problem.

It would be useful to see a full breakdown of those results.

There's always a bottleneck on something for any particular task and we
shouldn't presume the problem is only on CPU, for all data on all
systems. CPU parallelism is the most pressing problem, I agree, but I
think we will quickly hit problems without memory limits. But I agree
with Andrew that this will be a nice problem to have and not everything
is possible by Nov 1.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support