## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
> > On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominated by connection
> > startup time (how long does it take to transfer 16MB on a 10GbE link?
> > See...).
>
> And if we've only got a WAN link from one DC to another 360 miles away?
Well... TCP handshake wi
On 08/27/2017 02:23 PM, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there
any reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce
transfer time?
On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominate
## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
> Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there
> any reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce
> transfer time?
On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominated by connection
startup time (how long does it take t
Hi,
(Yes, its old. Nothing I can do about that.)
Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there any
reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce transfer time?
Also, does that change require a full restart (difficult with production
systems)?
Thanks
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Joseph Kregloh wrote:
> > It is my understanding that if PostgeSQL has log shipping enabled, if for
> > whatever reason it cannot ship the file the master server will hold it.
> But
> > for how long?
>
> Forever (which means it dies because
Joseph Kregloh wrote:
> It is my understanding that if PostgeSQL has log shipping enabled, if for
> whatever reason it cannot ship the file the master server will hold it. But
> for how long?
Forever (which means it dies because of running out of space in the
partition containing pg_xlog).
> Seco
It is my understanding that if PostgeSQL has log shipping enabled, if for
whatever reason it cannot ship the file the master server will hold it. But
for how long?
Secondly, I have 2 servers I ship log files to using the following script:
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
# Slave 1
rsync -a $1 pgi@192.168.1
On 10/26/2014 09:46 PM, nurul [via PostgreSQL] wrote:
Thank you for your response. May i know what is the difference between
log shipping and streaming replication actually? I'm sorry i am very new
in postgreSQL and still confused with these two
For an overview see:
http://www.postgresql.org/
Thank you for your response. May i know what is the difference between log
shipping and streaming replication actually? I'm sorry i am very new in
postgreSQL and still confused with these two
__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:02 PM, nurul [via PostgreSQL]
wrote:
>
> We have install PostgreSQL 9.3 in Ubuntu. We want to ask it is possible to do
> log shipping replication in one machine with different port such as port 5435
> as a master while 5436 as a slave? We also tried that process in one
On 10/21/2014 12:02 AM, nurul [via PostgreSQL] wrote:
We do the log shipping replication process based on
http://www.themagicnumber.es/replication-in-postgresql-i?lang=en
thats a rather old blog entry, appears to be talking about postgres 8.3
--
john r pierce
We have install PostgreSQL 9.3 in Ubuntu. We want to ask it is posibble to do
log shipping replication in one machine with different port such as port
5435 as a master while 5436 as a slave? We also tried that process in one
machine but still get an error in slave such as
warning: connection to th
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:32:33AM +1300, Tim Uckun wrote:
> > What about running a 32bit build of PG on the 64bit machine?
>
> How would one go about doing something like this?
Depending on your distribution you should be able to install 32bit
binaries alongside 64bit binaries; for example in De
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Tim Uckun wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> What about running a 32bit build of PG on the 64bit machine?
>
>
> How would one go about doing something like this?
Compiling with the proper -march flags I believe. It's been like 5
years since I had to mess with such things, so go
>
> What about running a 32bit build of PG on the 64bit machine?
>
How would one go about doing something like this?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 02:08:33PM +1300, Tim Uckun wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
> > bit
> > > server to a 32 bit server.
> >
> > I think the doc is quite correct.
>
> So what is the bes
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
I know what you think:-)
Problem is, he asks high availabilty, that means, no SPOF, minimum
down time. For the purpose, I suppose pgpool-HA(actually
heartbeat)+pgpool-II+Slony-I might work, but I'm not sure heartbeat
does work with 32/64bit combo.
Heartbeat does work wi
> >> >> > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
> >> >> > bit
> >> >> > server to a 32 bit server.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think the doc is quite correct.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > So what is the best way to accomplish a failover from a 64 bit machine
> >> > to a
> >> > 32 b
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> >> > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
>> >> > bit
>> >> > server to a 32 bit server.
>> >>
>> >> I think the doc is quite correct.
>> >
>> >
>> > So what is the best way to accomplish a failover from a 6
> >> > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
> >> > bit
> >> > server to a 32 bit server.
> >>
> >> I think the doc is quite correct.
> >
> >
> > So what is the best way to accomplish a failover from a 64 bit machine to a
> > 32 bit machine?
>
> slony?
IMO Slony
>
>
>
> slony?
>
That sound more like a question than an answer :)
Can I presume it doesn't care about the architecture of the OS?
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Tim Uckun wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>
>> > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
>> > bit
>> > server to a 32 bit server.
>>
>> I think the doc is quite correct.
>
>
> So what is the best way
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64
> bit
> > server to a 32 bit server.
>
> I think the doc is quite correct.
>
So what is the best way to accomplish a failover from a 64 bit machine to a
32 bit machin
> According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64 bit
> server to a 32 bit server.
I think the doc is quite correct.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.
According to the documentation it's not possible to log ship from a 64 bit
server to a 32 bit server.
I just want to confirm that this is the case before I waste a whole lot of
time trying to set it up.
riginal Message-
From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:41 PM
To: Porell, Chris
Cc: 'pgsql-general@postgresql.org'
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] log shipping/DB recovery with PostgreSQL 7.4
Porell, Chris wrote:
I am trying to bring up a disaster recov
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:41 PM
To: Porell, Chris
Cc: 'pgsql-general@postgresql.org'
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] log shipping/DB recovery with PostgreSQL 7.4
Porell, Chris wrote:
> I am trying to bring up a disaster recovery database using a cold-copy of
&g
Porell, Chris wrote:
I am trying to bring up a disaster recovery database using a cold-copy of
the datafiles on a different machine. I've got all WAL files since this
copy was made. Is it possible to make a 7.4 DB apply the WALs to the DB
when I bring it up?
No, you need to be running >8.x.
I am trying to bring up a disaster recovery database using a cold-copy of
the datafiles on a different machine. I've got all WAL files since this
copy was made. Is it possible to make a 7.4 DB apply the WALs to the DB
when I bring it up?
Thanks!
Chris
-
29 matches
Mail list logo
