Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups
Date: 2016-02-10 15:18:20
Message-ID: 20160210151820.GV3331@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* David Steele (david(at)pgmasters(dot)net) wrote:
> On 2/10/16 9:44 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Hrmmm. If that's the case then perhaps you're right. I liked the
> > general idea of not having to maintain a TCP connection during the
> > entire backup (TCP connections can be annoyingly finicky in certain
> > environments...), but I'm not sure it's worth a lot of additional
> > complexity.
>
> Well, pgBackRest holds a connection to PostgreSQL through the entire
> backup and will abort the backup if it is severed. The connection is
> always held locally, though, even if the master backup process is on a
> different server. I haven't gotten any reports of aborted backups due
> to the connection failing.

Yeah, I know, I had been thinking it might be nice to not do that at
some point in the future, but thinking on it further, we've already got
a "pick up where you left off" capability with pgbackrest, so it's
really not a huge deal if the backup fails and has to be restarted, and
this does remove the need (or at least deprecate) to use the "stop an
already-running backup if you find one" option that pgbackrest has.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-10 15:21:11 Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Previous Message David Steele 2016-02-10 15:16:00 Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups