Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 06:11:40PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > swooping elephants must be an interesting sight. If pigs can fly ... > > Is this what you had in mind? > > http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/dumbo.gif Hmm, something like that, but Dumbo does no

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-04 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 06:11:40PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > swooping elephants must be an interesting sight. If pigs can fly ... Is this what you had in mind? http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/dumbo.gif A ---(end of broadcast)--- TI

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Chris Browne wrote: > In contrast, Slony-I regenerates all the indexes on a given table in a > "one swell foop" fashion, which might be expected to allow cacheing to > provide a bit better performance than you could get with "pg_dump | > psql". I'm left wondering whether the swoop is actually fel

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-04 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Sullivan) writes: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:15:23AM +0800, Ow Mun Heng wrote: >> I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, >> I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. > > Nope, you don't need to do that. You need a copy

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-04 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:15:23AM +0800, Ow Mun Heng wrote: > I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, > I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. Nope, you don't need to do that. You need a copy of the _schema_ on the target machine. But slony

[GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-04 Thread Ow Mun Heng
I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. However during the startup of slony, I noticed that it issues a truncate command to the (to be) replicated table. Hence, this means that there's no such need for me

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-03 Thread Ow Mun Heng
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 19:17 -0500, Geoffrey wrote: > Ow Mun Heng wrote: > > However during the startup of slony, I noticed that it issues a truncate > > command to the (to be) replicated table. Hence, this means that there's > > no such need for me to do a dump/restore in the 1st place. > > > Thi

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-03 Thread Geoffrey
Ow Mun Heng wrote: {resend as don't see it on the list after 4 hours} I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. You don't need to do this. However during the startup of slony, I noticed that it issues

Re: [GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-03 Thread Bill Moran
In response to Ow Mun Heng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, > I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. > > However during the startup of slony, I noticed that it issues a truncate > command to the (to be) replicat

[GENERAL] [OT] Slony (initial) Replication - Slow

2008-01-03 Thread Ow Mun Heng
{resend as don't see it on the list after 4 hours} I'm just wetting my hands with slony and during the setup of the slave, I did and dump and restore of the master DB to the Slave DB. However during the startup of slony, I noticed that it issues a truncate command to the (to be) replicated table.