Robert Landrum wrote:
> I'm working with a very large database.  300 tables and about 350 
> sequences.  Dumped, it's about 8GB of data.
>
> I've read several posts that seem to indicate that I need to let slony 
> sync my data between the master and the slave when I subscribe the 
> slave to the master.  I would prefer to avoid this, as it'll take 
> quite a while for the sync to take place.  After about 2 hours and 30 
> minutes, I'm only about 5% complete.
>
> Is this just a limitation of slony? Or is there a workaround I've missed?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
Hey Rob,
  When I've had large databases to replicate, I've always started them 
up piece meal.  I'll add in a table at a time and once it is synced, I 
merge it into the set I intend it to be in.  This way if there is a 
problem with a table, it doesn't stop the whole process, I can just skip 
that table until I figure out what the problem is.  It also keeps me 
from having as huge a set of updates to handle once the initial sync is 
done, since it will catch up all the already subscribed tables after 
each new table finishes the initial sync.  The down side of this process 
is that it is very manual.

I hope this helps,
  --Ty