Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> You don't. As I said, any physical backup is going to be
>> all-or-nothing. These techniques are not a replacement for pg_dump.
> But this is just an artifact of the fact that the WAL is a single
> instance-wide entity, rather than a per-database entity. But since
> databases are completely separate entities that cannot be simultaneously
> accessed by any query (corrections welcome), there isn't any reason in
> principle that the WAL files cannot also be created on a per-database
> basis.
WAL is not the bottleneck ... as I already mentioned today, pg_clog (and
more specifically the meaning of transaction IDs) is what really makes a
cluster an indivisible whole at the physical level.
If you want to do separate physical dumps/restores, the answer is to set
up separate clusters (separate postmasters). Not so hard, is it?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
