Going with your first option, a master->slave replication, has the added benefit that you build the expertise for doing Continuous Point In Time Recovery, and after you do this storage system migration you can use that knowledge to put in a place a permanent standby server. Yes, it is a bit of work, but you'd kill two birds with one stone, and these are worthwhile birds. If you've got a busy server, and you want to do regular back-ups, and you don't have a much more expensive/sophisticated solution at your behest (or you want to support load balancing of reads in the future), this is probably something you want to do anyway. I don't see why your rsync option wouldn't work. Unless there is something about rsync that I don't know (and there might be), I would think that you would end up with consistent copies of the file systems, and so the question in my mind is whether the downtime for shutting down Postgres and doing a second rsync will be acceptable. If you go the "snapshot" route, the most important thing is ensuring that you're "crash consistent" across all volumes together. You'll want to make sure that whatever is implementing the snapshot can support lumping together all of the volumes into a management group of some sort. It's up to you to figure out the implementation details of whatever solution you're using. Just take care not to end up in a situation such that all of the intra-volume writes are consistent but the inter-volume writes are not, which would mean a corrupted Postgres. -- AWG On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:58:10AM +0200, Armand du Plessis wrote: > We're looking into options for the least intrusive way of moving our > pg_data onto faster storage. The basic setup is as follows : > > 6 disk RAID-0 array of EBS volumes used for primary data storage > 2 disk RAID-0 array of EBS volumes used for transaction logs > RAID arrays are xfs > > It's the primary data volumes we'd like to switch onto a faster RAID array. > > The options I'm looking at are the following: > > - Setup new slave on similar hardware, do a normal master -> slave > failover when it's ready. Upside, minimal downtime. Downside, quite a lot > of work for something that's essentially just a copy of data > - rsync the data storage to new RAID-0 array. stop Postgres. rsync again > to apply changes. Change mount points and restart Postgres. Longer downtime > but seems to be the most straight forward. > - Go the full route of stopping Postgres, make consistent snapshots of > all the volumes and recreate a new RAID-0 array from them and restarting. > https://github.com/alestic/ec2-consistent-snapshot > > The rsync route sounds like the most straight-forward option, however I'm a > little worried about it's consistency on a busy filesystem despite it being > stopped when the second sync happens. > > Scripting the snapshotting, and reassembling of the RAID array sounds like > the most reliable way of doing it and possibly the quickest as well. > > Any pitfalls, gotchas or suggestions for making the switch? > > Kind regards, > > Armand -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
