| From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Stefan Fercot <stefan(dot)fercot(at)protonmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: post-freeze damage control |
| Date: | 2024-04-09 23:29:38 |
| Message-ID: | f2e7f916-b32f-48ac-8200-7a803a241b5e@pgmasters.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/10/24 01:59, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>> On 9 Apr 2024, at 18:45, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe we should explicitly advise users to not delete that WAL from
>> their archives, until pg_combinebackup is hammered a bit more.
>
> As a backup tool maintainer, I always reference to out-of-the box Postgres tools as some bulletproof alternative.
> I really would like to stick to this reputation and not discredit these tools.
+1.
Even so, only keeping WAL for the last backup is a dangerous move in any
case. Lots of things can happen to a backup (other than bugs in the
software) so keeping WAL back to the last full (or for all backups) is
always an excellent idea.
Regards,
-David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-04-09 23:34:49 | wal_consistemcy_checking clean on HEAD |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-04-09 23:22:38 | Re: Speed up clean meson builds by ~25% |