On 2014-02-21 15:14:15 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 2/17/14, 7:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >But do you really want to keep that snapshot around long enough to > >copy the entire database? I bet you don't: if the database is big, > >holding back xmin for long enough to copy the whole thing isn't likely > >to be fun. > > I can confirm that this would be epic fail, at least for londiste. It takes > about 3 weeks for a new copy of a ~2TB database. There's no way that'd work > with one snapshot. (Granted, copy performance in londiste is rather > lackluster, but still...)
I'd marked this email as todo: If you have such a huge database you can, with logical decoding at least, use a basebackup using pg_basebackup or pg_start/stop_backup() and roll forwards from that... That'll hopefull make such huge copies much faster. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
