On 7/14/2011 3:50 PM, Christopher Browne wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Frank McGeough > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I have a 3 server cluster with slow replication currently. I believe it is >> because a very large transaction (> 1,000,000 rows) yielded a low of dead >> tuples in the slony log tables. I see a lot index bloat in the slony tables >> - sl_seqlog has a index_ratio of 68.65, for example. sl_confirm is 78. >> >> Could I run >> >> cluster sl_seqlog using sl_seqlog; >> >> and help this situation? > > Yep, that should be helpful. > > In version 2.0, we changed strategy for sl_seqlog, so that it only > collects values when sequences actually change, so it should be > expected to churn a whole lot less.
We also identified a problem with large backlog in the selection from sl_log_n. This has been fixed in the upcoming 2.1 but not yet been backported into 2.0. Jan -- Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
