On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:22 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > incremental page size is reduced in the actual backup. My preference > tends toward a block-level approach if we were to do something in this > area, though I fear that performance will be bad if we begin to scan > all the relation files to fetch a set of blocks since a past LSN. > Hence we need some kind of LSN map so as it is possible to skip a > one block or a group of blocks (say one LSN every 8/16 blocks for > example) at once for a given relation if the relation is mostly > read-only.
So, in this thread, I want to focus on the UI and how the incremental backup is stored on disk. Making the process of identifying modified blocks efficient is the subject of http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoahOeuuR4pmDP1W=jnryp4fwhyntosa68bfxjq-qb_...@mail.gmail.com Over there, the merits of what you are describing here and the competing approaches are under discussion. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
