Re: finding changed blocks using WAL scanning

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: finding changed blocks using WAL scanning
Date: 2019-04-18 21:52:38
Message-ID: 20190418215238.eeii6znzlr6z7exe@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-04-18 17:47:56 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I can see a 1GB marker being used for that. It would prevent an
> incremental backup from being done until the first 1G modblock files was
> written, since until then there is no record of modified blocks, but
> that seems fine. A 1G marker would allow for consistent behavior
> independent of server restarts and base backups.

That doesn't seem like a good idea - it'd make writing regression tests
for this impractical.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-04-18 21:57:39 Re: Race conditions with checkpointer and shutdown
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-04-18 21:50:31 Re: pg_dump is broken for partition tablespaces