From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Igor Chudov <ichudov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |
Date: | 2011-09-11 14:27:44 |
Message-ID: | CAGTBQpbL5gvv-pk3RYBO-B1FMBfOPXcKG7GaYzHWogchJNLePA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> wrote:
> Upgrading to major versions of PG may or may not be painful. (mysql
> sometimes works seamlessly between versions, it appears brilliant. But I
> have had problems with an update, and when it goes bad, you dont have a lot
> of options). In the past PG's only method of upgrade was a full backup of
> old, restore in new. Things have gotten better, there is new pg_upgrade
> support (still kinda new though), and there is some 3rd party replication
> support where you replicate your 9.0 database to a new 9.1 database, and at
> some point you promote the new 9.1 database as the new master. Or something
> like that. I've only read posts about it, never done it. But with that
> much data, you'll need an upgrade plan.
I have used slony to do database migration. It is a pain to set up,
but it saves you hours of downtime.
Basically, you replicate your 9.0 database into a 9.1 slave while the
9.0 is still hot and working, so you only have a very small downtime.
It's an option, but it's a lot of work to set up, only warranted if
you really cannot afford the downtime.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Colson | 2011-09-11 14:36:25 | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |
Previous Message | Andy Colson | 2011-09-11 14:23:20 | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |