Re: Postgres UPGRADE from 9.2 to 9.4

2016-09-09 1:09 GMT+12:00 Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:25 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 9/6/2016 4:20 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote:
> >>
> >> If you use slony to replicate, you CAN have 9.2 on the master and 9.4 on
> >> the slave.
> >
> >
> > does rackspace support slony? how about amazon dms ?
> >
> > slony requires configuring replication on each table. if the database
> has a
> > large complex schema this could take considerable setup effort.
> >
>
> Not really. As of slony 2.2 you can use a regular expression to add
> tables or sequences.
>
> i.e.:
>
> SET ADD TABLE (
> SET ID=1,
> TABLES='public\\.*'
> );
>
> repeat for sequences. Two commands. I don't consider that considerable
> effort.
> --
> To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Slony

The main drawback to Slony-I even as a replication system is the *complexity
of its setup and administration*. The design of the system, with the
database itself being used for queueing row updates, also significantly
increases the amount of data writing and I/O done by the DBMS.
Also, since Slony-I is asynchronous master-slave, all writes have to be
segregated to the master. Additionally, there is a noticeable lag (1-3
seconds) between the master and the slaves which may cause users to have an
inconsistent view of the data.

So, Slony won't be used by us.