| From: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Shih Théo *EXTERN*' <galaxyshih(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The sequence of WALs to be replayed |
| Date: | 2015-09-15 13:33:05 |
| Message-ID: | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B50FA6FD3@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Shih Théo wrote:
> I am using postgres incremental backup for quite a month. Every thing so far works great for me.
> However, one thing confuses me. That is the sequence of how WALs to be replayed.
> I know I can read this information when I turn on the log function but the sequence inside is not so
> clear especially when the amount of WALs is quite large.
> I need to know this information because I need to estimate how long does each restore take.
> Could somebody help me please.
The WAL segments are procesed in order, and that is the name of the file
interpreted as hex number (I'm ignoring the issue of timelines here).
You should be able to figure out the starting WAL segment from the
backup.label file in the backup.
Does that help?
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | HEARNE, TIMOTHY S | 2015-09-15 22:05:25 | Need to calculate PostgreSQL memory usage |
| Previous Message | Shih Théo | 2015-09-14 10:05:20 | The sequence of WALs to be replayed |