Re: Clarification on using pg_upgrade
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Clarification on using pg_upgrade |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4241f359-ec01-dc73-f742-20fdbc81755a@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Clarification on using pg_upgrade (Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Clarification on using pg_upgrade
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 4/19/16 11:01 PM, Tory M Blue wrote: >>> >> Slon is also starting to not be viable as it takes some indexes over 7 >>> >> hours to complete. So this upgrade path seemed to really be nice. >> > >> > >> > If you're standing up a new replica from scratch on the latest version, I'm >> > not really sure why that matters? > Not sure why the 7-13 hours causes an issue? Because if I'm upgrading > via slon process, I have to add and drop a node. If I'm dropping my > secondary (slave) I have to move reporting to the master, so now the > master is handing normal inserts and reports. Next item, I'm without > a replica for 13+ hours, that's not good either. Don't drop and add a node, just do a master switchover. AFAIK that's nearly instant as long as things are in sync. -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com 855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: