| From: | "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_rawdump |
| Date: | 2010-10-22 01:03:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20101022010340.GD27839@cuci.nl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>Greg Stark wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Stephen R. van den Berg <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl> wrote:
>> > In order to simplify recovery at this point (enormously), it would
>> > have been very helpful (at almost negligible cost), to have the name
>> > of the table, the name of the columns, and the types of the
>> > columns available.
>> > Why don't we insert that data into the first page of a regular table
>> > file after in the special data area?
>I was thinking we could dump a flat file very 15 minutes into each
>database directory that had recovery-useful information. It wouldn't be
>perfect, but would probably be sufficient for most forensics.
It would definitely be better than the current state.
But it still disconnects the information from the files they belong to (a bit).
>From a cost/benifit ratio point of view, I'd still prefer to interlace
the information into the tablefiles (which also scales better in case of
numerous tables).
--
Stephen.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-10-22 01:09:57 | Re: Simplifying replication |
| Previous Message | Stephen R. van den Berg | 2010-10-22 00:59:13 | Re: pg_rawdump |