Sonarr (dev) now supports postgres
Sonarr (dev) now supports postgres
Thought I would let you all know in case you have missed it. A few days ago Postgres support was finally merged into Sonarr dev branch (meaning 4.x version). I have already transitioned to it, so far it runs without issue
You can mostly follow the same instructions as for Radarr from here: https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/postgres-setup
I used the following temporary docker container to do the conversion (obviously replace stuff you need to):
docker run --rm -v Route\to\sonarr.db:/sonarr.db --network=host dimitri/pgloader pgloader --debug --verbose --with "quote identifiers" --with "data only" "sqlite://sonarr.db" "postgresql://user:pwd@DB-IP/sonarr-main"
When it completed the run, it outputs a kind of table that shows if there were any errors. In my case there were 2 tables (cant remember which ones anymore) that couldn't be inserted, so I edited those manually afterwards, so it matches the ones in the original DB.
What are the advantages of using postgres? It makes radarr/sonarr faster?
I have this same question. I'm running Emby, Sonarr, Radarr and Sabnzbd on a 16GB RAM 4 year old laptop and it seems just fine performance wise. What could I be missing out on?
I was curious too, so I looked into their Github issues. Apparently, SQLite doesn't play well with k8s due to the distributed/networked nature of the environment. According to comments in the pull request, that seems to be the main driver. And apparently, Radarr already has a Postgres option.
Though, there are requests going back to 2017 to support it...just because, I guess? That person seems to just want all their data in one DB for some reason.
SQLite doesn't like NFS, the file locking isn't stable/fast enough so any latency in the storage can cause data loss, corruption or just slow things down.
However SQLite to MySQL is relatively peanuts, Postgres less so...
Still it's a nice move for those that don't run containers on a single host with local filesystems.
This is very exciting, I’ve felt that SQLite has held back the performance of the *arrs for a long time so I’m excited to see this.
We'll be able to tell with real comparative data now that both options are available, but I'd be shocked if SQLite itself is the bottleneck, especially in a low concurrency scenario (which is the case for most installations of star apps).