On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 19:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> Anyway, I'm hoping to see some discussion of what to do next and what
> the PITR functionality ought to look like from a user's standpoint.
As previously discussed on general ...
* WAL files archived to a different location instead of recycling.
* The ability to force a WAL log switch to ensure all changes during the
backup are flushed to archived logs and copied.
* Ability to easily apply WAL logs to a standby database. I'd love be
able to take a hot backup of my production database, bring it up on
another computer and keep it a log or two behind production by
continually copying and applying logs to it.
* Although not PITR, on a related note, having the ability to do
incremental pg_dumps would be a huge boon for those relying on pg_dumps
* Oracle 10g's Flashback feature is interesting. You can roll the
entire database back to a point in time with:
> flashback database to '3:00 pm';
I would have to say it's hardly critical. :)
In response to
pgsql-hackers-pitr by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-02-13 01:14:23|
|Subject: Re: Review of last summer's PITR patch |
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2004-02-12 23:59:43|
|Subject: Proposals for PITR|