Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dsASY-0001zD-DH for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:24:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dsASX-0001Uu-RH for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:24:17 +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 1dsASX-0001UW-3f for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:24:17 +0000 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net ([2001:470:e38f::11]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dsASU-00025A-7K for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:24:15 +0000 Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 820B85F799; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 12:24:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 12:24:13 -0400 From: Stephen Frost To: Don Seiler Cc: pgsql-admin Subject: Re: Upgrade master/slave: rsync? Message-ID: <20170913162413.GX4628@tamriel.snowman.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HD5e8e2AQkvkolIq" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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 --HD5e8e2AQkvkolIq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don, * Don Seiler (don@seiler.us) wrote: > Planning steps to upgrade our 9.2 DB to the latest stable 9.6 using > pg_upgrade. I've gone through the steps for a primary/standalone DB and > they work well. Looking into how then to upgrade the standby, the > documentation says that *the data_dir from the master should be rsync'ed = to > each slave*. >=20 > Is this truly the case? Having to copy all the data from the primary will > be a huge issue for our larger databases. I had hoped we'd just need to > upgrade the binaries, copy the old data dir to the new data dir, update > conf files as needed and turn it back on (similar to Oracle standby > upgrade). There is a method to avoid having to copy the data from the primary, but it requires using --link mode with pg_upgrade and it's a bit of an involved process that requires very carefully following the steps and doing additional validation. A discussion around exactly this is currenlty ongoing as to how we can improve the documentation on this method. You can find that discussion here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/VisenaEmail.10.2b4049e43870bd16.= 15d898d696f%40tc7-visena#VisenaEmail.10.2b4049e43870bd16.15d898d696f@tc7-vi= sena Thanks! Stephen --HD5e8e2AQkvkolIq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJZuVutAAoJEO1sijiDR2RVe8kQALcuCKsohqFTICH6ptPBvPfi 4cyWwNuspbkxSqp128vepdEqOFDDGSwXWhS2vg4WmxgMPZE8LWNMy4kt9F+AeQnz 7Yi2OQUKn8s52R6nyOirRMp0Xj1dIKZkYZJ8CTe9YrGFX6rZHvPmaQTX6hhSA4F4 VE6g++iQtIFpNl+rqMv3sxv9rGjcXvRj+l7EDaR/KG5wMriU+uk/+yzb+dNKR/1O BBppXGMdIQoptYnF3yb2kVNSdrbd26CzI2bCpgKd5H6SusSbPjRzJqMIgBmLoZV3 ENaPPp7t/I1y5uv7VIM0Xm7T4WVL8+vVjf5nuqJ0M6TrrXBB7xcwRoCjwrQzi+FQ JjW94td4Y/1oh5uTHuiPoEbJAaEk9CM1ygwfIpnMC+1WVnNwCSngOYw6YkDJghJT GY1/Cw4H8rd1HfMDKkzYSWytgDzJYU1YaiDqnX7kLPoGautIxaWYYLN2qAFZg+S6 E94VmbDli2PmmyxFSasicc2CgsmGvakKIDqOIREq2mesSD+UONyWvLVGKCM2EUrt CT8St6te/1hPmVX8YG3wmTxUScN+MhsImeLXVocHLZjhxqz4Cdmt7frU60FYK9i/ FRovNjuS/Eaqe9p5gDR1TRkzpcbE3WjmjMWOe9GtpCu9dCkLGPEyQOWYvkPlVpyX vuq1sGspCaK7aYNdy7HC =PiyT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HD5e8e2AQkvkolIq--