From: Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Replication Syatem
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:43:57 -0400
Organization: cbbrowne Computing Inc
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <60wsmh64f6.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
References: <7e4ba9550804280638ie81dc23w472785c83cd38fcf@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NCaFYqGzkW1nsI29T+s/fWPzj2w=
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org

meetgaurikanekar@gmail.com ("Gauri Kanekar") writes:
> We have a table "table1" which get insert and updates daily in high
> numbers, bcoz of which its size is increasing and we have to vacuum
> it every alternate day. Vacuuming "table1" take almost 30min and
> during that time the site is down.  We need to cut down on this
> downtime.So thought of having a replication system, for which the
> replicated DB will be up during the master is getting vacuumed.  Can
> anybody guide which will be the best suited replication solution for
> this.

The only reason that it would be necessary for VACUUM to "take the
site down" would be if you are running version 7.1, which was
obsoleted in 2002, which, it should be noted, was SIX YEARS AGO.

As has been noted, you seem to be presupposing a remarkably complex
solution to resolve a problem which is likely to be better handled via
running VACUUM rather more frequently.
-- 
output = reverse("ofni.sesabatadxunil" "@" "enworbbc")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/postgresql.html
Rules  of the  Evil Overlord  #181.  "I  will decree  that all  hay be
shipped in tightly-packed bales. Any wagonload of loose hay attempting
to pass through a checkpoint will be set on fire."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/>