"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> (2) there's not really much to be gained by reducing it. > That depends. The backup techniques I recently posted, using hard > links and rsync, saved us the expense of another ten or twenty TB of > mirrored SAN archival storage space, and expensive WAN bandwidth > upgrades. In piloting this we found that we were sending our > insert-only data over the wire twice -- once after it was inserted and > once after it aged sufficiently to be frozen. Aggressive freezing > effectively cut our bandwidth and storage needs for backup down almost > by half. (Especially after we made sure we left enough time for the > VACUUM FREEZE to complete before starting that night's backup > process.) Hmmm ... if you're using VACUUM FREEZE, its behavior is unaffected by this GUC anyway --- that option makes it use a freeze age of zero. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
