Re: Backup options?
От | Albe Laurenz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Backup options? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B17D36F3A@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Backup options? (Magnus Persson <magnus.e.persson@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
Magnus Persson wrote: > What implications does a call to pg_dumpall have on my databases? It will cause load (mostly I/O). It will start long-running transaction that can cause autovacuum to lag behind on cleaning up busy tables, leading to database bloat. > Is there even a remote chance that a lock could be started by pg_dumpall? The only locks are on tables, and they only block ALTER/DROP TABLE. > If we consider that I for some reason or the other can't use pg_dumpall against the production > clusters, what are my options? One idea is that of using asynchronous replication and pull the dumps > off of them. Are there any pitfalls related to the replication? Yes; unless configured properly, the dump may fail because of conflicts. You'd have to use hot_standby_feedback=on, and that again can cause bloat on the master cluster as described above. > During normal operations, will > postgres ensure that the state on the slaves always reflect the state of the masters? In effect it > would work similar to if I did the dump on the production servers? I recall reading something about > asynchronous replication, but I'm unsure of what it was exactly or if it affects backups. The standby database is identical to the master database, but it may be a little behind. That is no problem at all for a backup. Don't use synchronous replication for this purpose. Yours, Laurenz Albe
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: