Re: streaming replication vacuum

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, dhaval jaiswal <dhavallj(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: streaming replication vacuum
Date: 2011-12-31 03:43:08
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJMU9KpG__hSsuC6dXDgOO1J2B7YNUiHqZPnDTC97sYHQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 07:35, dhaval jaiswal <dhavallj(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Might be discussed but not clear for the below query.
>>>
>>> In async. streaming replication do I need to run VACUUM & ANALYZE on both
>>> master & slave.
>>> Bec, while querying on master getting below result, but slave's system table
>>> is not updated.
>>
>> You run VACUUM and ANALYZE on the master only, and the results are
>> automatically replicated to the slave.
>>
>> However, the *statistics views* on the slave are not updated. That's
>> why it looks like it's not been run, even though it has.
>
> Given the use of hot spares in this setup, wouldn't that kind of be a
> bug that they're not updated?

It's intentional. You don't need to, nor can you run VACUUM or
ANALYZE, so there is no need to look at those fields.

The stats tables show activity on the standby separately from the
master, which is useful.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Farber 2011-12-31 06:15:36 Re: Verifying a timestamp is null or in the past
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2011-12-31 00:06:21 Re: streaming replication vacuum