Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
1–10 of 67 posts
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#2(2018)
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#3No post body was provided.
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#4No post body was provided.
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#5This article mentions that a key piece of software they use in all this is Slony[0], software which allows replicating one primary/master to many secondaries/slaves, even when those replicas have different versions. That's pretty cool, but I'd like to instead draw your attention (dear reader) to the phenomenal writing happening in Slonys description of itself. It describes, in plain but technical language what Slony is, then immediately jumps into addressing "why should you use this?" and does so very directly. It reiterates the problem it solves, mentions other potential solutions by name to contextualize the current solution space, then explains in a nice bulleted list exactly the situations and niches that Slony is tailored for.
Oh my heavens, I wish every piece of technology described itself this way!
[0] - Slony -- https://www.slony.info/
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#6(2018)
was wondering why they were using old PG's :-)
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#7Irony. I think the HN post took down the Slony website.
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#8This article mentions that a key piece of software they use in all this is Slony[0], software which allows replicating one primary/master to many secondaries/slaves, even when those replicas have different versions. That's pretty cool, but I'd like to instead draw your attention (dear reader) to the phenomenal writing happening in Slonys description of itself. It describes, in plain but technical language what Slony…
Archived link, since it appears to be down at the moment: https://web.archive.org/web/20211031124351/https://www.slony...
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#9Thanks for sharing this. Really interesting. But a basic question, why not upgrading to PG 13 instead? I am curious about the reasons for staying on an older version of PostgreSQL.
Re: Updating a 50 terabyte PostgreSQL database (2018)
#10Thanks for sharing this. Really interesting. But a basic question, why not upgrading to PG 13 instead? I am curious about the reasons for staying on an older version of PostgreSQL.
I see it now that it's a 2018 article. Makes sense!