Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?
| От | Mark Felder |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | op.wbb6c50b34t2sn@cr48.lan обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it? (dennis jenkins <dennis.jenkins.75@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 10:46:00 -0500, dennis jenkins <dennis.jenkins.75@gmail.com> wrote: > > Aleksey, a suggestion: The vast majority of the postgresql wire > protocol compresses well. If your WAN link is not already compressed, > construct a compressed SSH tunnel for the postgresql TCP port in the > WAN link. I've done this when rebuilding a 300GB database (via slony) > over a bandwidth-limited (2MB/s) VPN link and it cut the replication > resync time down significantly. > SSH with the HPN patchset[1] would help as well if it's higher latency or if you're CPU limited as it can use multiple threads then. It works wonderfully for me on a 35mbit link. If you have a lower sized link that wouldn't benefit from the HPN patchset anyway it may be worth forcing Blowfish instead of AES to keep the CPU load lower. Hope that helps! [1] http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ FYI, the HPN patchset is included the base OpenSSH of FreeBSD 9 now.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: