Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR
Date: 2004-07-22 01:50:31
Message-ID: 40FF1D67.5090507@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> That gives us enough to talk through and begin some testing.
>
> Anybody have any other horror stories, bring 'em on.

I think that the PITR docs will have to be written in two sections. One
will need to be a pure reference that orthogonally describes the
options, etc. The other section will need to be a scenario-based
explanation of what to do/how to recover in all the major different
failure patterns. It's the only way people (I!) will understand it all.

From my point of view, what I need PITR to be able to do is allow me to
restore to any point in the 24 hour period between pg_dumpalls. I also
need to know what the exact criteria for deleting archived logs every 24
hours, and how that can be determined automatically in a script
(checking the pg_dumpall end-of-log marker exists as well). I need to
be told to copy, not move the logs. Also, I need to be sure that
pg_dumpall is enough, and I don't need to make sure I issue a checkpoint
before the pg_dumpall or anything.

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2004-07-22 01:51:04 Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-07-22 01:46:14 Re: miniscule compiler barf in pg_ctl.c