On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 06:51:44PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote: > On 07/25/2015 12:31 AM, David Fetter wrote: > >Folks, > > > >While in the best of all possible worlds, we'd have planned out a > >replication strategy before we get tables whose initial sync via > >"SUBSCRIBE SET" will never finish, we aren't always given that much > >ability to plan that soon. > > One thing I forgot to ask initially. What do you mean by "will never > finish"? Is that just being facetious about "it will take a long > time", is it that you don't have the disk storage to swallow the > back log that will accumulate or is it "outdated knowledge" from the > times when Slony did actually slow down with accumulation of > backlog?
As far as I could tell, backlog was accumulating faster than the initial sync was happening. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list Slony1-general@lists.slony.info http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general