Re: Any reason to use pg_dumpall on an idle database

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas" <andreas(dot)zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Any reason to use pg_dumpall on an idle database
Date: 2000-05-26 20:01:55
Message-ID: 003601bfc74d$3eff6f40$f823080a@sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > I think it is a good idea to backup pg_log first, then the rest.
> > Then you should imho be safe even if load is heavy.
> > No vacuum until finished of course.
>
> You know, that was always my assumption too, that doing pg_log first
> made things safer. I am not sure if it is 100% safe, though.

I think there is a problem with our "big" pagesize of 8k.
If we used the system page size (usually 2 or 4k) a write with a
concurrent read should imho not be possible. But since we need to write
2-4 system pages I am not so sure that that is atomic, thus we risc
backing up an incompletely written pg page.

sounds like a nogo :-(
Andreas

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Olivier PRENANT 2000-05-26 20:03:56 New Type
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas 2000-05-26 19:47:38 Re: Re: [SQL] aliases break my query