Re: autovacuum question

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:47 AM, Scot Kreienkamp <SKreien(at)la-z-boy(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Wish I could Tom. I need a non-production, read-write copy of the
> > database that is updated every 1-2 hours from production. I don't set
> > this requirement, the business does. I just have to do it if it's
> > technically possible.
> >
> > I found a way to do it very easily using LVM snapshots and WAL log
> > shipping, but the net effect is I'm bringing a new LVM snapshot copy of
> > the database out of recovery every 1-2 hours. That means I'd have to
> > spend 15 minutes, or one-quarter of the time, doing an analyze every
> > time I refresh the database. That's fairly painful. The LVM snap and
> > restart only takes 1-2 minutes right now.
> >
> > If you have any other ideas how I can accomplish or improve this I'm all
> > ears.
>
> I'm gonna take a scientific wild-assed guess that the real issue here
> is caching, or more specifically, lack thereof when you first start up
> your copy of the db.
>

ISTM that 9.0's read-only standby feature may be of use to you. I know it
doesn't help you *today* but have you looked at it yet?

--Scott M

>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>