On 01/03/2013 02:30 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I don't especially have a horse in the race, but ISTM that if you want
>> the information you want it to be able to persist across dump/restore,
>> at least optionally. If you can happily lose it when you're forced to
>> recover using a logical dump then it's not that important to you.
> On that point I guess we will just disagree. In my experience, if
> you are OK with a periodic pg_dump for your primary backup
> technique, then the data is just not that important to you.
Or the data doesn't change that much but in principle I agree with you.
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC
@cmdpromptinc - 509-416-6579
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2013-01-03 22:57:01|
|Subject: Re: pg_upgrade test script creates port conflicts in parallel testing|
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2013-01-03 22:30:49|
|Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation