Re: [GENERAL] Rsync to a recovering streaming replica?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Igor Polishchuk
Тема Re: [GENERAL] Rsync to a recovering streaming replica?
Дата
Msg-id A230B256-8F3C-407C-A589-FE9CAF4C056D@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на [GENERAL] Rsync to a recovering streaming replica?  (Igor Polishchuk <ora4dba@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [GENERAL] Rsync to a recovering streaming replica?  (Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Sorry, here are the missing details, if it helps:
Postgres 9.6.5 on CentOS 7.2.1511

> On Sep 27, 2017, at 10:56, Igor Polishchuk <ora4dba@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I have a multi-terabyte streaming replica on a bysy database. When I set it up, repetative rsyncs take at least 6
hourseach. 
> So, when I start the replica, it begins streaming, but it is many hours behind right from the start. It is working
forhours, and cannot reach a consistent state 
> so the database is not getting opened for queries. I have plenty of WAL files available in the master’s pg_xlog, so
thereplica never uses archived logs. 
> A question:
> Should I be able to run one more rsync from the master to my replica while it is streaming?
> The idea is to overcome the throughput limit imposed by a single recovery process on the replica and allow to catch
upquicker.  
> I remember doing it many years ago on Pg 8.4, and also heard from other people doing it. In all cases, it seamed
working. 
> I’m just not sure if there is no high risk of introducing some hidden data corruption, which I may not notice for a
whileon such a huge database. 
> Any educated opinions on the subject here?
>
> Thank you
> Igor Polishchuk



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Igor Polishchuk
Дата:
Сообщение: [GENERAL] Rsync to a recovering streaming replica?
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [GENERAL] Catching errors inside a LOOP is causing performance issues