| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Incrementally Updated Backup |
| Date: | 2006-09-20 20:20:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20060920202017.GY28987@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:09:43PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > But why in the world would you want to stop the slave to do it? ISTM
> > we would want to arrange things so that you can copy the slave's files
> > while it continues replicating, just as with a standard base backup.
>
> You can do that, of course, but my thinking was that people would regard
> the technique as "unsupported", so I added a quick flag as a prototype.
An advantage to being able to stop the server is that you could have one
server processing backups for multiple PostgreSQL clusters by going
through them 1 (or more likely, 2, 4, etc) at a time, essentially
providing N+1 capability.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-20 20:22:47 | Re: Phantom Command ID |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-09-20 20:16:38 | Re: Release notes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-20 20:26:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Incrementally Updated Backup |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-09-20 19:56:01 | Re: Dynamic linking on AIX |