Re: [GENERAL] Log shipping in v8.4.7
От | Ron Johnson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Log shipping in v8.4.7 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | dc8611df-7354-9ff9-dfe4-e4eb4623b93f@cox.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [GENERAL] Log shipping in v8.4.7 (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Log shipping in v8.4.7
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 08/27/2017 02:23 PM, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > ## Ron Johnson (ron.l.johnson@cox.net): > >> Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there >> any reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce >> transfer time? > On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominated by connection > startup time (how long does it take to transfer 16MB on a 10GbE link? > See...). And if we've only got a WAN link from one DC to another 360 miles away? > That's even worse when using rsync via ssh transport without > ssh's connection multiplexing - key exchange and authentication > can easily take longer than the data transfer. Compression won't > save you much time, but sure won't break anything either (but > it will take some amount of CPU time). > On really slow links, your mileage may vary. > >> Also, does that change require a full restart (difficult with >> production systems)? > Even in 8.4 archive_command is marked PGC_SIGHUP, so a reload > will be sufficient. The sample configuration and perhaps pg_settings > (can't remember how informative that was back then) should > tell you the same. Thanks
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: