No! Actually I'm wearing my tin hat right now and I Never say Anything
about My Suspicions about 9/11 on Internet in fear of Echelon catching
and filing me.
---
Hannu
hmm, a little bit Para?
http://www.myvideo.de/watch/1776449
Ok, now your point of View its more clearly...
-
C. 'backup _is_ replication' is also true
--
Hannu
It is useless to speak with a person like you about the diffrence between
Backup and Replications.Both Things having diffrent Concepts and
Approaches,
but for you it is all the same.
What should i say? Thadts the typically scandin
Joshua D. Drake schrieb:
This is not acceptable on our lists. Do not post in such a way again.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Hi Josh,
Your're right, but this special Guy has just boring me a lot with
Replication Things but
my [Featurerequest] on the Topic was dedicated to "Streaming
Onlineback
Filip Rembiałkowski schrieb:
please take following remarks:
thx, but if i need some advice form a scandinavian dickhead then i will
let you know this
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Markus Schiltknecht schrieb:
Hi,
apoc9009 wrote:
Thadt is Replication NOT Backup
I've now read all of your messages in this thread, but I simply fail
to understand why you are that much opposed to the term 'replication'.
I think the only thing which comes any close to what
Trevor Talbot schrieb:
Backup 12/24/2008 Version 2
/pg/backup/12_24_2008/base/rcvry.rcv<--- Basebackup
/pg/backup/12_24_2008/changes/0001.chg <--- Changed Data
/changes/0002.chg <--- Changed Data
/changes/0003.chg <--- Changed Data
Andrew Sullivan schrieb:
It seems that what you want is near-real-time online backups with _no
cost_, which is not a feature that I think anyone will ever work on.
A
100% Correct!
I think anyone commit the Statement, thadt a Databases is a very
imported Part of Software
for a wide range of P
Simon Riggs schrieb:
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 12:53 +0200, apoc9009 wrote:
You've either not read 23.4.4 or haven't understood it. If the text is
unclear, documentation additions/changes are always welcome.
I have read this:
PostgreSQL directly supports file-based log s
Heikki Linnakangas schrieb:
apoc9009 wrote:
"Without datalosses" is utopy. For that, you'd need something like
synchronous replication, otherwise you're always going to have a window
where you have something committed in the server, but not yet in the
backup. So it's ju
So you want the user to still be connected to the failed machine, but at
the same time be connected to the new live failover machine ?
-
Hannu
No.
The User should be connected to the running db without restrictions
while backup is in progress
Apoc
---(end of bro
You've either not read 23.4.4 or haven't understood it. If the text is
unclear, documentation additions/changes are always welcome.
I have read this:
PostgreSQL directly supports file-based log shipping as described above.
It is also possible to implement record-based log shipping, though thi
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/warm-standby.html
Particularly section 23.4.4
23.4.4 is thadt what iam using just im Time but this ist not eneought
for me!
No Versioning, no chances to prevent data losses
You have to wait until a WAL File ist written (Default Value for WAL
Files
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/warm-standby.html
Particularly section 23.4.4
Thadt is Replication NOT Backup
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Hi Hackers,
In my Project i have to handle a Database with 600 GByte Text only,
distributed on 4 Tablespaces
on multiple Harddisks and Remote SAN's connected via Gigaethernet to the
Remote SAN-Storage.
I need more flexibility by doing Backups of my big Database, but the
built in Online Backu
14 matches
Mail list logo
