Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: beta testing version

From: "Mitch Vincent" <mitch(at)venux(dot)net>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: beta testing version
Date: 2000-12-01 01:37:58
Message-ID: 01c901c05b37$55e67770$0200000a@windows (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > No, WAL does help, cause you can then pull in your last dump and recover
> > up to the moment that power cable was pulled out of the wall ...
>
> False, on so many counts I can't list them all.

Why? If we're not talking hardware damage and you have a dump made sometime
previous to the crash, why wouldn't that work to restore the database? I've
had to restore a corrupted database from a dump before, there wasn't any
hardware damage, the database (more specifically the indexes) were
corrupted. Of course WAL wasn't around but I don't see why this wouldn't
work...

Note I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking that you explain your comment
a little more. If WAL can't be used to help recover from crashes where
database corruption occurs, what good is it?

 -Mitch


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: GHDate: 2000-12-01 01:50:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: PHPBuilder article -- Postgres vs MySQL
Previous:From: Nathan MyersDate: 2000-12-01 01:15:29
Subject: Re: beta testing version

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group