| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Weimann <cweimann(at)k12hq(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: High Performance/High Reliability File system on SuSE64 |
| Date: | 2004-01-31 05:07:53 |
| Message-ID: | 26690.1075525673@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-performance |
Christopher Weimann <cweimann(at)k12hq(dot)com> writes:
> You can do snapshots in FreeBSD 5.x with UFS2 as well but that (
> nor XFS snapshots ) will let you backup with the database server
> running. Just because you will get the file exactly as it was at
> a particular instant does not mean that the postmaster did not
> still have some some data that was not flushed to disk yet.
It *will* work, if you have an instantaneous filesystem snapshot
covering the entire $PGDATA directory tree (both data files and WAL).
Restarting the postmaster on the backup will result in a WAL replay
sequence, and at the end the data files will be consistent. If this
were not so, we'd not be crash-proof. The instantaneous snapshot
is exactly equivalent to the on-disk state at the moment of a kernel
crash or power failure, no?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-31 05:27:47 | Re: Files in pg_xlog |
| Previous Message | Russell Shaw | 2004-01-31 01:39:04 | Re: Alternative to "Money" ... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kari Lavikka | 2004-01-31 08:52:40 | Re: Unique index and estimated rows. |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-01-31 04:35:31 | Re: views? |