Re: pg_upgrade and rsync

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade and rsync
Date: 2015-01-29 05:07:30
Message-ID: 20150129050730.GO3854@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Josh Berkus (josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com) wrote:
> On 01/28/2015 02:28 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > On 01/28/2015 02:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> So 390MB were transferred out of a possible 474MB. That certainly seems
> >> like we're still transferring the majority of the data, even though I
> >> verified that the hard links are being sent as hard links. No?
> >
> > Looks like the majority of that was pg_xlog. Going to tear this down
> > and start over, and --exclude pg_xlog.
> >
>
> So, having redone this without the pg_xlog lag, this appears to work in
> terms of cutting down the rsync volume.
>
> I'm concerned about putting this in the main docs, though. This is a
> complex, and fragile procedure, which is very easy to get wrong, and
> hard to explain for a generic case.

So, for my 2c, I'm on the fence about it. On the one hand, I agree,
it's a bit of a complex process to get right. On the other hand, it's
far better if we put something out there along the lines of "if you
really want to, this is how to do it" than having folks try to fumble
through to find the correct steps themselves.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matt Kelly 2015-01-29 05:18:09 Exposing the stats snapshot timestamp to SQL
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2015-01-29 05:01:28 Re: pg_upgrade and rsync