| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Streaming a base backup from master |
| Date: | 2010-09-03 15:20:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20100903152008.GS26232@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin,
* Kevin Grittner (Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov) wrote:
> While 1GB granularity would be OK, I doubt it's optimal; I think CRC
> checks for smaller chunks might be worthwhile. My gut feel is that
> somewhere in the 64kB to 1MB range would probably be optimal for us,
> although the "sweet spot" will depend on how the database is used.
> A configurable or self-adjusting size would be cool.
We have something much better, called WAL. If people want to keep their
backup current, they should use that after getting the base backup up
and working. We don't need to support this for the base backup, imv.
In any case, it's certainly not something required for an initial
implementation..
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-09-03 15:22:35 | Re: Streaming a base backup from master |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2010-09-03 15:18:49 | Re: Windows Tools |