On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 12:23 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 11/30/2004 11:29 AM, Rod Taylor wrote:
> 
> > I've been trying various methods of making Slony fail, and have noticed
> > that after numerous attempts that the database is growing quickly in
> > size without any data.
> > 
> > The reason of course is the initial COPY, when rolled back, leaves a ton
> > of dead tuples in the structures an indexes.
> > 
> > Please consider adding a VACUUM of the subscriber in between retries.
> 
> Unfortunately it is impossible to add a vacuum to slon right in between 
> the delete and the copy, since everything is done in one transaction 
> (and has to). So this can only be an administrative suggestion.

I mean between the 2 attempts of slony to go through the initial copy --
so after slony issues a rollback() on the subscriber.

--