Re: minimal wal_level on subscriber

From: "Arnaud L(dot)" <arnaud(dot)listes(at)codata(dot)eu>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: minimal wal_level on subscriber
Date: 2020-01-17 07:43:44
Message-ID: 34ff1759-f26f-8a90-5b2c-3c76be582f60@codata.eu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Le 16/01/2020 à 19:58, Laurenz Albe a écrit :
> On Thu, 2020-01-16 at 12:09 +0100, Arnaud L. wrote:
>> is it OK to set wal_level to minimal on the subscriber side of the
>> logical replication ?
>
> Yes, if you don't want physical backups.

You mean online physical backups ?
I could still shutdown the subscriber and take an offline physical
backup, right ?

Regards
--
Arnaud

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2020-01-17 08:26:55 Re: Wall shiping replica failed to recover database with error: invalid contrecord length 1956 at FED/38FFE208
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2020-01-16 18:58:56 Re: minimal wal_level on subscriber