Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Cc: Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)
Date: 2000-04-06 18:05:55
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
> At 06:17 PM 4/6/00 +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
> >
> >On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
> >
> >> If it runs as a separate utility, there's no way for it to guarantee
> >> a dump consistent with the previous run of pg_dump, right?
> >
> > If you dump your tables via pg_dump and promptly you dump LO via
> >pg_dumplo, IMHO you not have problem with DB consistency.
> Folks who have popular web sites with a world-wide audience don't have
> the traditional early-morning "quiet periods", etc that local databases
> tend to enjoy.  Since my group of folks are distributing a web toolkit
> for general use, I tend to think in very general terms and any solution
> we distribute wants to be very general, as well.

How do you get around vacuum downtime?

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-04-06 18:05:56
Subject: Re: Temporary indexes
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-04-06 18:02:19
Subject: VACUUM of temp tables

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-04-06 18:06:50
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)
Previous:From: Don BaccusDate: 2000-04-06 17:33:11
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group