| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tory M Blue <tmblue(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Clarification on using pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2016-04-03 17:13:56 |
| Message-ID: | 57014F54.3050204@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 3/24/16 12:43 PM, Tory M Blue wrote:
> Slon is also starting to not be viable as it takes some indexes over 7
> hours to complete. So this upgrade path seemed to really be nice.
If you're standing up a new replica from scratch on the latest version,
I'm not really sure why that matters?
> Not sure how I can incorporate with my slon cluster, I guess that will
> be the next thing I research.
Not sure I'm following, but you can pg_upgrade your replicas at the same
time as you do the master... or you can do them after the fact.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2016-04-03 17:18:59 | Re: Big number of connections |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2016-04-03 02:53:27 | Re: Searching GIN-index (FTS) and sort by timestamp-column |