| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tory M Blue <tmblue(at)gmail(dot)com>, Torsten Zühlsdorff <foo(at)meisterderspiele(dot)de>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Are folks running 8.4 in production environments? and 8.4 and slon 1.2? |
| Date: | 2009-10-18 05:05:40 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10910172205k3549711cq25f9675cb68ec1b4@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net> wrote:
> Tory M Blue wrote:
> > Also not real pain? A full dump and restore again, can't see that not being
> > painful for a DB of any real size.
> I am running Slony on 8.4; it complains on init but I have checked it
> EXTENSIVELY and it is replicating fine. I have a distributed forum
> application that uses Slony as part of the backend architecture and it would
> choke INSTANTLY if there were problems.
>
> Didn't dump and restore.
Yeah, we haven't done that since pgsql 8.1. Now on 8.3. Won't be
doing it for 8.4 either.
We use slony to do it here and we wait until it's proven stable as a
slave before we promote 8.4 / new slony to take over.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melton Low | 2009-10-18 05:07:36 | Re: table full scan or index full scan? |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira de Oliveira | 2009-10-18 05:00:22 | Re: table full scan or index full scan? |