| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Elliot Chance" <elliotchance(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Vladimir Rusinov" <vladimir(at)greenmice(dot)info> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump and XID limit |
| Date: | 2010-11-24 14:54:20 |
| Message-ID: | 4CECD2BC0200002500037DE9@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Vladimir Rusinov <vladimir(at)greenmice(dot)info> wrote:
> I think it would be advisable not to use pg_dump on such load.
Agreed.
> Use fs- or storage-level snapshots instead.
Or PITR backup techniques. Or hot/warm standby. Or streaming
replication. Or one of the many good trigger-based replication
products. Just about any of the alternatives would be better than
pg_dump in the described scenario. If you leave any transaction
open for hours during a heavy OLTP transaction load you're probably
going to get unpleasant bloat in your database.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-24 15:16:48 | Re: pg_dump and XID limit |
| Previous Message | Szymon Guz | 2010-11-24 14:25:48 | Re: Deny access materialzsed view |