On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Isn't more effective hold this info in Postgres than in backup sw? >> Then any backup sw can use this implementation. > > I don't think it means it can't be implemented in Postgres, but does it > need to be done in backend? > > For example, it might be a command-line tool similar to pg_waldump, > which processes WAL segments and outputs list of modified blocks, > possibly with the matching LSN. Or perhaps something like pg_receivewal, > doing that in streaming mode. > > This part of the solution can still be part of PostgreSQL codebase, and > the rest has to be part of backup solution anyway.
I agree with all of that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
