2017-12-20 21:18 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > So I'm somewhat hesitant to proclaim option 5 as the clear winner, > here. > >> > >> I agree. I think (4) is better. > > > > Can depends on load? For smaller intensive updated databases the 5 can be > > optimal, for large less updated databases the 4 can be better. > > It seems to me that the difference is that (4) tracks which pages have > changed in the background, and (5) does it in the foreground. Why > would we want the latter? >
Isn't more effective hold this info in Postgres than in backup sw? Then any backup sw can use this implementation. > -- > Robert Haas > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >
