I am migrating Oracle database into Postgres and I need to implement replication of the master database to multiple slave dbs. The replication should be executed once a day at specified time (to take the load off the dbs) and only replicate the data that was changed.
I am trying to achieve that using Slony - it seems to do what I need except it syncs the data in short intervals. I haven't been able to find any information on how to configure Slony for scheduled sync, is it even possible?
Or do I have to launch slon daemons at desired time and then kill them using some script/scheduler?
Yes, you can specify lag_interval to set sync within specified interval, here is the documentation . You can specify this option for Slony daemon with -l option.
Related
I wanted to check if there is a way to stop and resume PostgreSQL replication using pglogical? For some reason, if either the publisher or subscriber needs to restart and go offline for sometime (or connectivity issues because of some n/w issues), is there a way to stop the replication and resume it again? I know it is not a relevant example but AWS DMS (which used Postgres native logical replication) gives you an option to stop/resume the replication. Wanted to check if there is a similar option available in pglogical.
Thanks
Sure there is. I presume You have pglogical extension installed and there is standard logical replication:
select pglogical.alter_subscription_disable('subscription_name');
You can use a WHERE clause to aim it specifically:
select pglogical.alter_subscription_disable(subscription_name) from pglogical.subscriptions where writer = 'name_of_writer';
Assuming I have 2 postgres servers (1 master and 1 slave) and I'm using Patroni for high availability
1) I intend to have three-machine etcd cluster. Is it OK to use the 2 postgres machines also for etcd + another server, or it is preferable to use machines that are not used by Postgres?
2) What are my options of directing the read request to the slave and the write requests to the master without using pgpool?
Thanks!
yes, it is the best practice to run etcd on the two PostgreSQL machines.
the only safe way to do that is in your application. The application has to be taught to read from one database connection and write to another.
There is no safe way to distinguish a writing query from a non-writing one; consider
SELECT delete_some_rows();
The application also has to be aware that changes will not be visible immediately on the replica.
Streaming replication is of limited use when it comes to scaling...
I have an app that can run in offline mode. If offline it uses a local mongo database, if it has a data connection it will use a remote mongo database.
Is there an easy way to sync these two databases and make sure they both have the union of their collections and documents?
EDIT: Effectively there are two databases that could both have insertions and deletions happening on them that aren't happening on the other. At fixed points in time I would like to have both databases show the union of them both.
For example over a period of time.
DB1.insert(A)
DB1.insert(B)
DB2.insert(C)
DB1.remove(A)
RUN SYNC
DB1 = DB2 = {B, C}
EDIT2: Been doing some reading. It's not the intended purpose but could they be set up as slaves replica sets of the remote and used that way? Problem is that I think replicas need to have a replica hosts must be accessible by way of resolvable DNS. Not sure how the remote could access local host.
You could use replica set but MongoDB doesn’t support master-master replication. Let's assume if you have setup like this:
two nodes with priority 1 which will be used as remote servers
single arbiter to ensure majority if one of remotes dies
5 local dbs with priority set as 0
When your application goes offline, it will stay secondary so you won't be able to perform writes. When you go online it will sync changes from remote dbs but you still need some way of syncing local changes. One of dealing with could be using local fallback db which will be used for writes when you are offline. When you go online, you push all new records to master. A little bit trickier could be dealing with updates but it is doable.
Another problem is that it won't scale up if you'll need to add more applications. If I remember correctly, there is a 12 nodes per replica set limit. For small cluster DNS resolution could be solved by using ssh tunnels.
Another way of dealing with a problem could be using small restful service and document timestamps. Whenever app is online it can periodically push local inserts to remote and pull data from remote db.
We have a 5 node replication set up on our development server. We are looking for a way to allow developers to back up a subset of data in a mongo db and restore this to their local development enviroments.
We have looked into the clonedb and the mongodump utils, but both only allow for a backup/dump of the complete database. Due to the possible size of the database, we need an option that allows us to limit the data being backed up or restored.
Do any know of a util or way to achieve this?
I just stumbled upon this question again and decided to add a description of our backup strategy we opt in for:
Current back up strategy for our mongo db this server consist of 2 setups; backup via delayed passive secondarynode and daily backup using mongodump (takes journalling and oplog into play).
Besides our normal production nodes, we have setup another secondary node with a priority of 0 (this can either be on its own server or piggy backing off another mongo server but using a seperate port), hidden as true and a delay of 7200 seconds (2hours). This slave is there for "butter fingers", when some one accidentally drops a database or clears a collection, we have 2 hours before these changes replicate to this passive secondary. The passive secondary can NOT be used for READING or WRITING. It's role is simply a back up node. We also use this node for nightly backup to prevent unnecessary overhead on any of the other nodes.
The nightly backup is set to run every night at 23:00 via a cron tab. The command simply executes a script setup in /opt/auto-mongo-backup. This script can be found at https://github.com/jaconel/automongobackup (originally found it at https://github.com/micahwedemeyer/automongobackup). This script allows for a single nightly cron to cover weekly backups and monthly backups. Back ups are saved at /var/backups/mongodb.
Hope this helps some one out.
I need to replicate a PostgreSQL database server as follows:
Two servers are adjacent to each-other - one is the master and the other standby. If the master fails, the standby takes over. Replication from master to slave needs to be failsafe, hence, synchronous. The standby will not be used for any querying unless it has become a master. So, no high-availability/load-balancing is required.
There is another backup server at a remote location. Data from the master server mentioned above will be replicated to this remote server asynchronously and in batches. Time is not a factor at all in this replication - a couple of hours is just fine. This server would be used just for backup.
I've studied the currently available replication solutions from the PostgreSQL docs as well as from Google, but can't decide which combination of synchronous-asynchronous solutions would I need.
The closest I came up with is using pgpool-II for scenario 1 and Mammoth for scenario 2. However, as pgpool is statement-based, what would happen to queries containing rand() and now()?
Please note that I'd rather use free and open-source replication tools.
Also, just a side question - according to scenario 1 above, when the master fails, the standby will take over. Would the master-slave role be reversed after that, or would after the recovery of the master server the slave would go back to its standby state?
Any suggestion would be highly appreciated. Thanks.
I suggest using DRBD for scenario 1 and either 9.0 built-in replication or Slony for scenario 2.
Before PostgreSQL 9.1 (not yet released), there is no other synchronous replication solution available, and DRBD is widely established for this purpose. Together with Pacemaker or Heartbeat, which come with all the scripts needed for PostgreSQL monitoring and switchover, you have a very robust and fairly easy to manage solution. (In fact, I'd consider continuing to use DRBD even after 9.1 comes out; it's just a lot easier and has a longer track record.)
For the cross-site asynchronous, you could try the built-in replication of PostgreSQL 9.0, perhaps in conjunction with repmgr for monitoring and management. Alternatively, you could try the (now a bit) old-school Slony, but I'd guess it will more complicated for your needs.
You didn't mention if the server in question was on a specific version or if this was a new project with the freedom to choose the version. The answers vary based on that information.
If you are starting with a clean slate, I would recommend designing based on the PostgreSQL 9.1 beta. The final version will be released long before you would be ready to go into a production environment and it has binary synchronous replication built-in.
I've been using the built-in asynchronous replication in PostgreSQL for years in almost the exact same scenario you describe and it has always been rock-solid for me. It's become even better with 9.0 with Hot standby and it's become much easier to configure and maintain. 9.1 provides the only missing piece you require.
However, if you are trying to replicate an existing server, built-in asynchronous replication with aggressive settings for "checkpoint_timeout" a very frequent backup of unarchived WAL files could be sufficient until you can upgrade to 9.1.
The bottom line here is that you can get exactly what you want is with stock PostgreSQL 9.1--no third-party products required.
As for failover, it is not an automatic process, you'll need to handle that yourself. I would recommend that after a failover, switching the roles of the two machines until either the next failover event or until a controlled manual failover during a scheduled outage during a slow period of use. Again, this is not automatic and much be managed by the administrator (via shell scripts, presumably).