| From: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Are ZFS snapshots unsafe when PGSQL is spreading through multiple zpools? |
| Date: | 2023-01-18 17:26:51 |
| Message-ID: | 6ce6bae1-07db-594e-d87e-fdc3126c738c@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 1/18/23 10:54, Rob Sargent wrote:
> On 1/18/23 09:38, HECTOR INGERTO wrote:
>>
>> I wanted to understand the underlying issue.
>>
>> I use ZFS snapshots instead of a “correct” backup because with only two
>> machines it allows me to have backups in the main machine and in the
>> secondary too that acts as hotspare at the same time.
>>
>> To accomplish the same I would need 3 nodes. The main, the replica
>> hotspare and the proper backup.
>>
>
> Isn't "proper backup" typically thought of as offsite reloadable file
> capture, hopefully relatively recent? Disaster recovery, and all that.
That is in fact what "proper backup" means. "Hot spare" means high
availability, and *HA is not DR*.
--
Born in Arizona, moved to Babylonia.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-18 17:56:46 | Re: Interpreting postgres execution plan along with AND/OR precedence |
| Previous Message | Dirschel, Steve | 2023-01-18 17:03:21 | Interpreting postgres execution plan along with AND/OR precedence |