Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Klaus Naumann <kn(at)mgnet(dot)de>,markw(at)osdl(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
Date: 2004-07-14 13:20:08
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-adminpgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I've not done power off tests, yet. They need to be done just to
> check...actually you don't need to do this to test PITR...

I agree, power off is not really the point here.  What we need to check
into is (a) the mechanics of archiving WAL segments and (b) the
process of restoring given a backup and a bunch of WAL segments.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2004-07-14 15:04:02
Subject: Re: serverlog rotation/functions
Previous:From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB SDDate: 2004-07-14 09:57:17
Subject: Re: Point in Time Recovery

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Thomas WabnerDate: 2004-07-14 13:27:36
Subject: shutdown postgres under windows
Previous:From: Claudia Dantas ProcopioDate: 2004-07-14 12:04:16
Subject: Help - Error in createdb

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-07-14 13:35:55
Subject: Re: serverlog rotation/functions
Previous:From: Oliver ElphickDate: 2004-07-14 08:41:46
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Is "trust" really a good default?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group