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

Re: Fast index build vs. PITR

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Subject: Re: Fast index build vs. PITR
Date: 2004-06-01 02:03:08
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > What I'm thinking about right now is tweaking the index-build code to
> > write to WAL only if it sees that PITR is actually in use.  It would
> > have to look at the GUC variables to determine whether WAL archiving
> > is enabled.  If archiving isn't turned on, then we could assume that
> > rollforward from a past backup isn't needed in this installation, and
> > use the WAL-less index build method.
> Seems reasonable.

What happens if someone turns on archiving while the index is being
built?  Is that possible?

I assume if someone turns on archiving in postgresql.conf, sighups the
postmaster, then does a tar backup, they should be able to do archiving,

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2004-06-01 02:04:23
Subject: Re: Converting postgresql.conf parameters to kilobytes
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-06-01 02:01:34
Subject: Re: CVS tip problems

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group