Tue Aug 5 00:19:40 PDT 2008
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Strange behavior adding a new node, very, VERY slow
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Strange behavior adding a new node, very, VERY slow
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sorry, I should mention that this is Postgres 8.2.4, and Slony 1.2.14 Martin Eriksson wrote: > Hi everyone. > > I've been using slonly for a while now and feel pretty confident with > what im doing but I can not understand what is going now! > > current setup: > 1 Master > 2 slave1 (provider = 1) > 3 slave2 (provider = 1) > > adding a new node 4 (provider = 1) > > machines on same hardware, all machines are pretty nice machines, 8 > gigs of ram in each machine > master got 6 gigs allocated to postgres, slave machines got 3.2 gigs > allocated. all running ubuntu 64 bit > > database is a total of 7.9 gigs (including the slony schema, total > data that need to be replicated around 3.5 gigs) > > master and slave 1 are sitting next to each other connected with a 1 > GB/s line on a separate interface. > > now node 4, I created a new postgres installation on slave 1 machine, > running on different port same memory allocation (3.2 gigs) so total > usage of memory on that machine by the two postgres servers is 6.4 gig > (still 1.4 gig free) > > On saturday I did sync up node 2 from scratch and it toke a total of > 20 minutes. > > Sunday afternoon database was put in production and being used, its > not a overly used database around 18000, slony event per 24h with a > total of 2000-3000 db commits on Master per 24h > > So yesterday morning I started to sync node 4, and now 22h later it is > still running!!! and its only 1/3rd done!!! > > does anyone got a good explination for this? > > I look on the slave 2 machine, 0.2-0.4 load, memory is available, only > using a fraction of the bandwidth, io-stats are down. It is more or > less the same for the Master as low cpu load and low io load, and low > bandwidth usage. > > looking on the db, it appear that its trying to do EVERYTHING in a > single transaction as tables that have been copied are still showing > up as count(*) = 0, is there a way to not do everything in a single > transaction?? > > or anyone got some other idea?? > > _______________________________________________ > Slony1-general mailing list > Slony1-general at lists.slony.info > http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Strange behavior adding a new node, very, VERY slow
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Strange behavior adding a new node, very, VERY slow
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list