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
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 |