Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcqBk-0005jS-Is for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:39:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcqBj-0005sJ-Ij for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:39:03 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcqA2-0003yj-BU for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:37:18 +0000 Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcq9z-0005cy-Qc for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:37:17 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id d196so37208956wmd.0 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 01:37:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:subject:from:reply-to:to:date:in-reply-to:references :mime-version; bh=/Cogqr1MVoG+93t9KJfKVcYf+AUEhGjirvrF/zYejj0=; b=QZP2ZBIOSRoiQOan3ruxvYg+eguHoy/jTVQSDgMHNXKCpA4slsZZ+PEDHe4Z6X67Rz s6SLnj80CmoH0P5oKTPDhuSgfyoBqLNaNAFuMOqr/fKxVTtsYQJtyeP3bRi9TEq0OGpz X1fyS3hTfJugBrRMggJHTlM4qAuMITBDswBDJDo/PJVMB4+E+i2PzzYVT7IaXusuDIfA SGWtZaMRJWLvoWLSt5hQUJj8z9G5riRzUUZj+585lGseFMqARV1hy2d07gGDXWY/zA8W 0iRI/DMdcKhtCipVP2ZO8TxPkSPPMeYCGodxzzIA1IUqO1EHN56UXYUxFG1IzzIOvJat 9KeQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:reply-to:to:date :in-reply-to:references:mime-version; bh=/Cogqr1MVoG+93t9KJfKVcYf+AUEhGjirvrF/zYejj0=; b=LEbBx2gswjjfPvGj22obxmMVnt0kX7DYszxBAW3NGwhQCP4EcmsJbryuUaNHo7YqRe cixiOuVsqfLORQCty7/EHEJCbjo+5zZ+UTOn/4sGpYZNv73C9gviPf+Za20Anb8DAtBz +aIzqtOpDXizhx4OsbFnWiB/85QiwbtjmIig0XQyW4jUj1TJfGR45zuijb6vKWgmfzB0 u6+4YzpudKvnNFP70GVLWcgAix7XIuGxhAv+n/iP6DFGXaubNEEDnUn1EYSTHPFAS1gY cMRIdzSagVWdUfUoc39uPTBtWVaVS0VmmMjGqp0r+oXelJLm28cDb5jlcpo9dQDZsz6K VCvg== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouu1bTVjki1nVsR89iZ3IlWxfmwqXGpJ+g+43lrV5/Vl8sBugNoUlHl+ac9X054bqw== X-Received: by 10.194.94.138 with SMTP id dc10mr7090816wjb.40.1472114233941; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 01:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enterprisedb01 (static.152.248.213.82.ibercom.com. [82.213.248.152]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id vv2sm13952521wjc.29.2016.08.25.01.37.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 01:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1472114217.9541.37.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Does CLUSTER generate WAL data? From: jaime soler Reply-To: jaime.soler@gmail.com To: Craig James , "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:36:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-b3o5JBIcWU6P++0nCIx9" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu3 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-admin Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org --=-b3o5JBIcWU6P++0nCIx9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit El mié, 24-08-2016 a las 16:06 -0700, Craig James escribió: > I know the CLUSTER command essentially creates a new table, copies > the data in INDEX order, then deletes the original table. > > Does that mean all of the data passes through the WAL logs, or is it > purely an internal operation? More specifically, if we're doing > streaming replication, will all of the data for the table being > clustered be transmitted across the network to the hot-standby slave? Yes for sure. > > Thanks, > Craig > > > --=-b3o5JBIcWU6P++0nCIx9 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
El mié, 24-08-2016 a las 16:06 -0700, Craig James escribió:
I know the CLUSTER command essentially creates a new table, copies the data in INDEX order, then deletes the original table.

Does that mean all of the data passes through the WAL logs, or is it purely an internal operation? More specifically, if we're doing streaming replication, will all of the data for the table being clustered be transmitted across the network to the hot-standby slave?

Yes for sure.

Thanks,
Craig

--=-b3o5JBIcWU6P++0nCIx9--