From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | tsuraan <tsuraan(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Streaming replication upgrade sanity check |
Date: | 2021-03-12 02:37:28 |
Message-ID: | 20210312023728.GB2999@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 08:01:24PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > He/she wants to run the standby, I guess in read-only mode, while
> > pg_upgrade is running, which is why I didn't even bother to mention
> > that. I think if downtime is the critical for this person, he/she
> > should be using logical replication for the upgrade. pg_upgrade really
> > wants full control of the primary/standbys during its operation, and if
> > you can't do that, pg_upgrade is not the right tool to use.
>
> What I typically do in that case is just spin up more replicas and let
> those handle the read load while the upgrade happens, and then throw
> them away after the upgrade of the primary plus the other standbys is
> done. I do agree that logical replication could be an alternative but
> that takes a lot longer and puts a number of constraints on what you can
> do while it's going on (DDL changes and such have to be done carefully,
> etc).
Agreed. He/she could use some replicas to take read-only traffic while
the upgrade happens, and use others to do a quick rsync upgrade using
the intructions in the pg_upgrade docs. I agree logical replication is
a lot more complex.
> > > unlogged tables before the pg_upgrade, et al, otherwise you'll end up
> > > rsync'ing those over. Also make sure you haven't got any stray or
> > > forgotten temp files or other things. Again, done properly, the rsync
> > > to upgrade the standbys should only be copying the catalog tables
> > > themselves and it should be quite fast.
> >
> > Yes, good points.
>
> Yeah.. Would really be nice if we had a custom written tool which knew
> how to detect unlogged tables and not try to copy them over and such.
> Might be able to make something that's faster and less error-prone than
> the rsync approach since we know a lot more about the PG data dir than
> rsync does.
True.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tilman Koschnick | 2021-03-12 08:59:38 | Re: applicable mapping for clientcert=verify-full |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2021-03-12 01:01:24 | Re: Streaming replication upgrade sanity check |