Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ecae2dcd-202f-24d6-aff2-c5cba3c487cb@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0 (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy]
9.6 -> 10.0
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/16/16 2:36 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Right. I am thinking of writing some docs about how to avoid downtime > for upgrades of various types. If there's some magic sauce to shrink pg_upgrade downtime to near 0 I think folks would be very interested in that. Outside of that scenario, I think what would be far more useful is information on how to do seamless master/replica switchovers using tools like pgBouncer or pgPool. That ability is useful *all* the time, not just when upgrading. It makes it trivial to do OS-level maintenance, and if you're using a form of logical replication it also makes it trivial to do expensive database maintenance, such as cluster/vacuum full/reindex. I've worked with a few clients that had that ability and it was a huge stress reducer. As a bonus, an unplanned outage of the master becomes far less stressful, because you already know exactly how to fail over. -- 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-hackers по дате отправления: