Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1xox5YcFOh5P_hNzxcNeVpGTu8N3ii6hfqGCdTFB5wBSA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/18/2014 07:20 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 03/17/2014 04:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net> writes:
>>> On 3/17/14, 8:47 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> (Note that this is only one of assorted O(N^2) behaviors in
>>>> older versions of pg_dump; we've gradually stamped them out
>>>> over time.)
>
>>> On that note, it's recommended that when you are taking a
>>> backup to restore into a newer version of Postgres you create
>>> the dump using the NEWER version of pg_dump, not the old one.
>
>> Right.  IIRC, the OP said he *did* use a recent pg_dump ... but
>> this particular issue got fixed server-side, so the new pg_dump
>> didn't help against an 8.1 server :-(
>
> Exactly. I backported the patch from 9.3 to 8.4 and saw a
> schema-only dump time go from <give-up-and-kill-it-after-5-days> to
> 1 hour. This was for a database with about 500k tables.

I wonder if doing large batches of

    LOCK TABLE table1, table2, table3, ...

would help, instead of doing individual statements?

If I recall correctly, someone did submit a patch to do that. It helped when dumping schema only, but not much when dumping data.

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Josh Berkus
Дата:
Сообщение: Wiki Page Draft for upcoming release
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: commit fest 2014-01 closed