Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-admin-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1jYll6-0001aN-7q
	for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 07:24:52 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-admin-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1jYll4-0005wh-RI
	for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 07:24:50 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <holger@jakobs.com>)
	id 1jYll4-0005vz-Jc
	for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 07:24:50 +0000
Received: from jakobs.com ([85.214.83.89] helo=rs.plausibolo.de)
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <holger@jakobs.com>)
	id 1jYll1-0000Rk-PP
	for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 07:24:49 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by rs.plausibolo.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC95BBE171E
	for <pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org>;
 Wed, 13 May 2020 09:24:44 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at rs.plausibolo.de
Received: from rs.plausibolo.de ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (h2367442.stratoserver.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
 port 10024)
	with ESMTP id p4sh90wFSBZd; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:24:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.178.97] (ip-37-201-154-65.hsi13.unitymediagroup.de
 [37.201.154.65])
	by rs.plausibolo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D9E0BE0826;
	Wed, 13 May 2020 09:24:42 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: what is the best way to access cold data on another server?
To: pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
References: 
 <CADTdw-yP_n1zDWPzNhBMe4z2siSoeU9rX4M7DLZCbtJfs1ThDQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Holger Jakobs <holger@jakobs.com>
Message-ID: <b207fb8a-7c2e-c21a-5786-361a31e71866@jakobs.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 09:24:41 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADTdw-yP_n1zDWPzNhBMe4z2siSoeU9rX4M7DLZCbtJfs1ThDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: de-DE
List-Id: <pgsql-admin.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-admin>
Precedence: bulk

dblink is outdated, postgres_fdw is current.

Am 13.05.20 um 09:12 schrieb Amine Tengilimoglu:
> Hello everyone;
>
>     In addition to the actively used data, there are other data that
> are very little accessed. I want to separate the less used data to
> save space and reduce maintenance operations. I want to use a separate
> postgres instance for this. Now the question is; How do I link these
> two instances? postgres_fdw or dblink? or what other solution? Which
> one would be better?
>
>
>
> thanks in advance..

-- 
Holger Jakobs, Bergisch Gladbach, Tel. +49-178-9759012