Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:47:08 -0500
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:

>
> > Restore file 220G
> >
> > 8.2.6 and 8.3.0 are configured identically:
> >
> > shared_buffers = 8000MB
> > work_mem = 32MB
> > maintenance_work_mem = 512MB
> > fsync = off
> > full_page_writes = off
> > checkpoint_segments = 300
> > synchronous_commit = off (8.3)
> > wal_writer_delay = off (8.3)
> > autovacuum = off
> >
> > 8.2.6 after 2 hours has restored 41GB.
> > 8.3.0 after 2.5 hours had restored 38GB.
>
> I just tested a ~110GB load. On our modest backup server, 8.2
> yesterday did the data load (i.e. the COPY steps) in 1h57m. Today,
> 8.3 on identical data and settings took 1h42m. Relation size is down
> by about 10% too, which is very nice, and probably accounts for the
> load time improvement.

Ergghh o.k. I am definitely missing something in the environment. By
your numbers I should be well over 100GB restored at 2.5 hours. I am
not. I am only 38GB in.

What type of IO do you have on that machine? What type of CPU and RAM?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit