Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
, German Becker german.bec...@gmail.com wrote: Let me describe the process I follow to get to this. What I am doing is testing a migration from 8.3 to 9.1. They way I plan to do it is the following. 1) Create the schema 2) import the biggest tables, which are not updated,only growing

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.comwrote: Maybe I didn't explain correctly. I am using COPY/pg_dump/pg_restore for migration (and it is working fine). The streaming replication is for hot-standby replication *once migrated*. Thing is I disbable archving

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
Thanks Amit, I understand now. Is there a way to know/predict how many prealocated segments will there be in a certain moment? What does it deppend on? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.comwrote: I didn't quite understand what you mean by that... But anyways

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 3:08 AM, German Becker german.bec...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Amit, I understand now. Is there a way to know/predict how many prealocated segments will there be in a certain moment? What does

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-23 Thread German Becker
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, now I understand. Also, looking at his ls -l pg_xlog, I could find that modified timestamps of all those pre-allocated segments are