Re: minimal wal_level on subscriber

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: arnaud(dot)listes(at)codata(dot)eu, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: minimal wal_level on subscriber
Date: 2020-01-17 18:07:46
Message-ID: fa3c4bfdaa9b812195667ec8424cce707fdb76c5.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, 2020-01-17 at 08:43 +0100, Arnaud L. wrote:
> > > is it OK to set wal_level to minimal on the subscriber side of the
> > > logical replication ?
> >
> > Yes, if you don't want physical backups.
>
> You mean online physical backups ?
> I could still shutdown the subscriber and take an offline physical
> backup, right ?

Yes, that is what I mean.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Igrishin 2020-01-17 21:17:57 RPC via WebSockets.
Previous Message Durgamahesh Manne 2020-01-17 14:20:13 Re: Regarding automatic table partitioning in PostgreSQL 12 version is possible or not