Tue Jan 22 05:22:59 PST 2008
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] What is the risk from running pg_dump on a replica
- Next message: [Slony1-general] What is the risk from running pg_dump on a replica
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jan 22, 2008 11:16 AM, Raymond O'Donnell <rod at iol.ie> wrote: > On 22/01/2008 13:11, Diego Algorta Casamayou wrote: > > > What usage could I give to this restored database? May I use it as a > > master in case the master died? In that case I think a failover to the > > running slave would be faster. > > Well, it's a backup - no more and no less. The whole point of Slony (or > any replication system) is that you have a nearly-up-to-date copy of > your database to which you can failover if the master goes belly-up. A > backup is always going to be less current than a well-running Slony slave. I know, I know. But for example, I currently have full backups made from my master node. And restoring that backup to use it as an independent database doesn't really work because it still has slony all over the place. Running UNINSTALL NODE on it doesn't work either. > > > What should I do to use it in a non-replicated environment? A staging > > environment, for example for testing purposes where I need > > production-like data. > > That's what I do; as well as keeping a copy as a backup, of course. :-) OK. But what do you do to get rid of slony on that restored database? This should be a common issue, but I can't find a clear note on it on the documentation. Thank you. -- Diego Algorta Casamayou http://www.oboxodo.com - http://diego.algorta.net
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] What is the risk from running pg_dump on a replica
- Next message: [Slony1-general] What is the risk from running pg_dump on a replica
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list