| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Doc update for pg_start_backup |
| Date: | 2007-06-29 08:25:12 |
| Message-ID: | 4684C1E8.7020803@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> Added a note to the docs that pg_start_backup can take a long time to
>> finish now that we spread out checkpoints:
>
> I was starting to wordsmith this, and then wondered whether it's not
> just a stupid idea for pg_start_backup to act that way. The reason
> you're doing it is to take a base backup, right? What are you going
> to take the base backup with? I do not offhand know of any backup
> tools that don't suck major amounts of I/O bandwidth.
scp over a network? It's still going to consume a fair amount of I/O,
but the network could very well be the bottleneck.
> That being
> the case, you're simply not going to schedule the operation during
> full-load periods. And that leads to the conclusion that
> pg_start_backup should just use CHECKPOINT_IMMEDIATE and not slow
> you down.
That's probably true in most cases. But on a system that doesn't have
quite periods, you're still going to have to take the backup.
To be honest, I've never worked as a DBA and never had to deal with
taking backups of a production system, so my gut feelings on this could
be totally wrong.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-06-29 12:10:38 | Configurable Additional Stats |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-06-29 07:49:33 | Re: lazy vacuum sleeps with exclusive lock on table |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Rief | 2007-06-29 09:34:59 | Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-06-29 07:04:45 | Re: [PATCHES] Doc update for pg_start_backup |