Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18701.1145220290@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with
Re: Is full_page_writes=off safe in conjunction with |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 11:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> No, we'll just change the test in xlog.c so that fullPageWrites is >> ignored if XLogArchivingActive. > I can see the danger of which you speak, but does it necessarily apply > to all forms of backup? No, but the problem is we're not sure which forms are safe; it appears to depend on poorly-documented details of behavior of both the kernel and the backup program --- details that might well vary from one version to the next even of the "same" program. Given the variety of platforms PG runs on, I can't see us expending the effort to try to monitor which combinations it might be safe to not use full_page_writes with. > It seems that we should write an API to allow a backup device to ask for > blocks from the database. I don't think we have the manpower or interest to develop and maintain our own backup tool --- or tools, actually, as you'd at least want a tar replacement and an rsync replacement. Oracle might be able to afford to throw programmers at that sort of thing, but where are you going to get volunteers for tasks as mind-numbing as maintaining a PG-specific tar replacement? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: