Re: autovacuum question

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Scott Mead <scott(dot)lists(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>wrote:

>
> 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?
>

Okay, so the RO database won't work. How much data are we talking? How
much growth do you see between snapshots?

--Scott M