Devrim GUNDUZ wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 12:14 -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> The only difference I can think of is not having to copy logfiles
>> around, but presumably that could be addressed by using hardlinks
>> instead of actually copying (at least on unix...) Maybe Devrim
>> has something else in mind?
>
> What I was thinking is to find a way to reduce network traffic in
> high-volume environments. If the archive_timeout is set to a really low
> value, such as 1 or 2 seconds, it may result in a high traffic.
Using hardlinks sounds like a viable alternative - but since AFAIK
postgres reuses old wal segments instead of deleting and recreating
them, I guess hardlinks wouldn't work....
> I thought that if both servers are in the same network, or better,
> directly connected to each other, they could share the same partition so
> that no network activity occurs.
But if they're connected over a fast network anyway, then copying wals
even every few seconds should be no problem, no?
greetings, Florian Pflug