On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 8:27 PM Ron wrote:
> On 1/14/22 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > * Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
> >> Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
> >> script (compared to the very simple version when using th
Greetings,
* David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 10:53 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > We already have pg_receivewal, which is part of pg_basebackup, and is
> > able to use a slot and such. I'm not sure that making pg_basebackup
> > somehow also work as an
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 10:53 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
> We already have pg_receivewal, which is part of pg_basebackup, and is
> able to use a slot and such. I'm not sure that making pg_basebackup
> somehow also work as an archive command makes much sense
I suppose my proposal should have been:
Greetings,
* David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 11:31 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
> > > Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
> > > script (compared to the very simple ve
On 1/16/22 13:12, Issa Gorissen wrote:
Just to avoid any misunderstanding. I am perfectly happy using the
backup/restore with pg_dump and we use it for at least a decade with
success for our need of backups.
I am using pgbackrest. I used to use pg_rman, being well acquainted with
rman backu
On 1/16/22 01:23, Mladen Gogala wrote:
On 1/14/22 16:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
I still don't really understand what is so great about it. About its
only redeeming feature is a declaration that "it is in core" and that
newcomers can just default to it without thinking. I'd rather just
p
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 11:31 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
> > Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
> > script (compared to the very simple version when using the exclusive
> backup
> > - but this this
On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 5:23 PM Mladen Gogala
wrote:
> On 1/14/22 16:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> I still don't really understand what is so great about it. About its only
> redeeming feature is a declaration that "it is in core" and that newcomers
> can just default to it without thinking.
On 1/15/22 16:23, Mladen Gogala wrote:
On 1/14/22 16:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
I still don't really understand what is so great about it. About its
only redeeming feature is a declaration that "it is in core" and that
newcomers can just default to it without thinking. I'd rather just
play
On 1/14/22 16:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
I still don't really understand what is so great about it. About its
only redeeming feature is a declaration that "it is in core" and that
newcomers can just default to it without thinking. I'd rather just
play favorites and write "use pgbackrest" in
On 1/14/22 3:42 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 1/14/22 13:04, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
On 1/14/22 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
snip]
We shouldn't be trying to provide
documentation around how to write a tool like pgbackrest, we should,
instead, have a tool like pgbackrest in core with its o
On 1/14/22 13:04, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
On 1/14/22 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
snip]
We shouldn't be trying to provide
documentation around how to write a tool like pgbackrest, we should,
instead, have a tool like pgbackrest in core with its own documentation,
as most other RDBMS's do
>On 1/14/22 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>snip]
>> We shouldn't be trying to provide
>> documentation around how to write a tool like pgbackrest, we should,
>> instead, have a tool like pgbackrest in core with its own documentation,
>> as most other RDBMS's do.
>That's an excellent solution to th
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 1:48 PM Ron wrote:
> On 1/14/22 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> [snip]
> > We shouldn't be trying to provide
> > documentation around how to write a tool like pgbackrest, we should,
> > instead, have a tool like pgbackrest in core with its own documentation,
> > as most ot
On 1/14/22 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
[snip]
We shouldn't be trying to provide
documentation around how to write a tool like pgbackrest, we should,
instead, have a tool like pgbackrest in core with its own documentation,
as most other RDBMS's do.
That's an excellent solution to this problem.
Greetings,
* Ron (ronljohnso...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 1/14/22 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >* Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
> >>Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
> >>script (compared to the very simple version when using the exclusive back
On 1/14/22 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Greetings,
* Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
script (compared to the very simple version when using the exclusive backup
- but this this is deprecated...).
I will tes
Greetings,
* Issa Gorissen (issa-goris...@usa.net) wrote:
> Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
> script (compared to the very simple version when using the exclusive backup
> - but this this is deprecated...).
>
> I will test your option with the simpler vers
Thx a lot. I thought about it but was not so sure about having a complex
script (compared to the very simple version when using the exclusive
backup - but this this is deprecated...).
I will test your option with the simpler version and post it back to it
can maybe land in PostgreSQL documenta
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 1:22 PM Issa Gorissen wrote:
> So I have this question, how to script the making of base backup for
> transfer on the slave server when the two SQL functions must be called
> in the same connection, in Bash for example; is this doable?
>
Not sure if I understand the probl
Hello all,
I've been upgrading some of our PostgreSQL instances from 9.x to 12.x
and we're using a master/slave setup based on continuous archiving.
I can read on
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/continuous-archiving.html 25.3.3.2.
Making an Exclusive Low-Level Backup that the exclusive me
21 matches
Mail list logo
