At 09:36 AM 2/2/2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> OTOH, I still take a full base backup every night and keep ten days
> worth of WAL files on our backup server, so I guess maybe I don't
> *completely* trust it :-)
Or you don't trust tape to be 100% reliable.
Well so far tapes get chewed up by drive
>>> Nowadays I also wonder about the restoration times of say 200GB or even
>>> TBs of data from backups. More fun if there are Very Important and
>>> Influential People popping in every 15 minutes to ask whether it's done
>>> yet.
>
> That's a problem with pg. pg_dump is single-threaded and can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/02/07 12:07, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> At 09:36 AM 2/2/2007, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> >
>> > OTOH, I still take a full base backup every night and keep ten days
>> > worth of WAL files on our backup server, so I guess maybe I don't
>> > *completely* tru
roopa perumalraja wrote:
Thanks a lot for your reply. To make it more clear will the be no
loss of data or data corruption when taking a base backup while there
is inserts & updates happening in the database?
Updates to the database continue uninterrupted.
The base backup alone is *not* enough
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/01/07 18:04, Glen Parker wrote:
>> Tarring hot database files still gives me the willies. But then, I
>> wear belt and suspenders.
>
> I understand. A list of "file changed while we read it" errors is just
> a little unnerving at first!
>
> I
Glen Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tarring hot database files still gives me the willies. But then, I
>> wear belt and suspenders.
> I understand. A list of "file changed while we read it" errors is just
> a little unnerving at first!
> I did quite a few end to end backup/PITR tests, a
Tarring hot database files still gives me the willies. But then, I
wear belt and suspenders.
I understand. A list of "file changed while we read it" errors is just
a little unnerving at first!
I did quite a few end to end backup/PITR tests, and no matter what I did
to the DB during backup,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/01/07 16:27, Glen Parker wrote:
>> Open-database file-level backups might work with PITR, but I
>> wouldn't trust it.
>
> IME, it does work, and very well. Inconsistencies in the heap files are
> trumped by the WAL archive during recovery.
Tar
Open-database file-level backups might work with PITR, but I
wouldn't trust it.
IME, it does work, and very well. Inconsistencies in the heap files are
trumped by the WAL archive during recovery.
-Glen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'k
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/01/07 03:02, roopa perumalraja wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While there are inserts & updates happening into the database, is
> it possible to make the base backup without losing any of the
> updates in the database?
pg_dump does transactionaly-consist
Thanks a lot for your reply. To make it more clear will the be no loss of data
or data corruption when taking a base backup while there is inserts & updates
happening in the database?
--
Roopa
Richard Huxton wrote:
roopa perumalraja wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While there are inserts & updat
roopa perumalraja wrote:
Hi all,
While there are inserts & updates happening into the database, is it
possible to make the base backup without losing any of the updates in
the database?
Yes, that's the whole point of PITR. The filesystem backup + WAL files
gives you a working database when re
Hi all,
While there are inserts & updates happening into the database, is it possible
to make the base backup without losing any of the updates in the database?
What does select pg_start_backup('label'); & pg_stop_backup(); do actually?
I am worried if the file system backup tool
13 matches
Mail list logo
