From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Yotsunaga, Naoki" <yotsunaga(dot)naoki(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: automatic restore point |
Date: | 2018-06-26 01:33:40 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwamx96qu6GAM8OuoM3DNEockiiiE=VOx1LV0_Hag5bOrQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 6:17 PM, Yotsunaga, Naoki <
yotsunaga(dot)naoki(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> So what do you think about it? Do you think is it useful?
>
The cost/benefit ratio seems low...
Also, when recovering with the current specification, tables other than the
> returned table also return to the state of the specified recovery point.
> So, I’m looking for ways to recover only specific tables. Do you have any
> ideas?
>
...and this lowers it even further.
I'd rather spend effort making the initial execution of said commands less
likely. Something like:
TRUNCATE table YES_I_REALLY_WANT_TO_DO_THIS;
which will fail if you don't add the keyword "YES_I..." to the end of the
command and the system was setup to require it.
Or, less annoyingly:
BEGIN;
SET LOCAL perform_dangerous_action = true; --can we require local?
TRUNCATE table;
COMMIT;
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2018-06-26 01:41:11 | Re: using expression syntax for partition bounds |
Previous Message | Yotsunaga, Naoki | 2018-06-26 01:17:31 | automatic restore point |