Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Michael Nolan
Subject Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?
Date
Msg-id CAOzAquJyb8wMGi2xmyy96uHoWJ8SbUKFyofLgKppV-FhFUVojg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?  (Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?  (Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 7/16/12, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm speccing up a three-node database for reliability, making use of
> streaming replication, and it's all working but I have a bit of a
> performance concern.
>
>
> Can the individual files' modification timestamps be relied upon? If
> so, it'd potentially mean a lot of savings, as the directory entries
> can be read fairly efficiently. I could still then use rsync to
> transfer those files (so if it's only a small part that's changed, we
> take advantage of its optimizations too).

I did several weeks of tests on 9.1.3 using mod time and file size
rather than checksumming the files, that did not appear to cause any problems
and it sped up the rsync considerably.  (This was about a 40 GB database.)
--
Mike Nolan

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: DB fails to start: "Could not read from file "pg_clog/0003" at offset 212992: No error.
Next
From: Chris Angelico
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?