Re: Upgrading to 9.4 to get replication slots (was Re: Streaming replication and WAL archiving)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Le 11 févr. 2015 16:42, "David F. Skoll" <dfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:04:43 -0700
> Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I don't remember the beginning of the thread. Did you consider Slony?
> > It's more configuration, but it would reduce downtime to almost 0.
>
> We have looked at Slony in the past, but AFAIK it cannot replicate
> tables that lack a primary key and we have a few of those.

This is a good reason to avoid slony but...

>  Also
> AFAIK, slony requires an initial sync of the databases with
> dump/restore.  Finally our database is quite busy and very
> write-heavy, so I worry about the performance impact of all the Slony
> triggers.
>

This is definitely wrong. Slony can do the initial sync by itself (ie without dump/restore).


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux