On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Andreas Kretschmer <andr...@a-kretschmer.de> wrote: > Am 21.07.2017 um 08:01 schrieb Michael Paquier: >> "No" is not completely exact and lacks in details. There are two cases >> where having an archive is helpful: >> 1) The standby has disconnected from its primary for a time long >> enough that WAL segments have been rotated by two completed >> checkpoints. If that happens, when the standby reconnects it would >> fail, and you would need to take a new base backup. > > you can prevent that using replication slots, but i'm pretty sure you > (Michael) knows that ;-) > http://paquier.xyz/postgresql-2/postgres-9-4-feature-highlight-replication-phydical-slots/
There is a typo on my URL here. Well that's too late to fix it even if that's bad style. >> 2) Backup strategies. Keeping a larger history set of WAL segments is >> helpful for incremental backups, which is partially the point actually >> raised upthread about PITR. > > Ack, that's right. Using both (streaming and wal-shipping/archiving) will > make it more robust, and you have (with archiving) the posibility for PITR. > BUT, you can build a streaming replication without archiving, even you can > build a continuous backup using only streaming (Barman, streaming only > mode). Backup solutions developed by experts on the topic are paths to reliability. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
