På søndag 21. september 2014 kl. 16:10:54, skrev Adrian Klaver < adrian.kla...@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>>: On 09/21/2014 06:50 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > På søndag 21. september 2014 kl. 15:48:00, skrev Adrian Klaver > <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>>: > > On 09/21/2014 05:44 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > På søndag 21. september 2014 kl. 13:51:00, skrev Bill Moran > > <wmo...@potentialtech.com <mailto:wmo...@potentialtech.com>>: > > > > > > > I see this limitation in Slyny: > > http://slony.info/documentation/2.2/limitations.html > > > > Slony-I does not automatically replicate > > > > * > > > > Changes to large objects (BLOBS) > > > > * > > > > Changes made by DDL commands > > > > * > > > > Changes to users and roles > > > > Not being able to replicate BLOBS is a show-stopper for me as we have > > lots of them. > > Well I would say it depends on where you are storing the binary data, in > large objects or in a bytea column? If you are using bytea columns then > you would be okay. If it is large objects then you have a problem. > > Large-objects, not BYTEA, as they allow for much more efficient > streaming (require less memory).
Here are some other suggestions from the project, though they are cluster wide(including PITR): http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/backup-file.html I think the rsync-approach is the most attractive option. -- Andreas Joseph Krogh CTO / Partner - Visena AS Mobile: +47 909 56 963 andr...@visena.com <mailto:andr...@visena.com> www.visena.com <https://www.visena.com> <https://www.visena.com>
