Re: [PATCHES] Incrementally Updated Backup

On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:09:43PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > But why in the world would you want to stop the slave to do it?  ISTM
> > we would want to arrange things so that you can copy the slave's files
> > while it continues replicating, just as with a standard base backup.
>
> You can do that, of course, but my thinking was that people would regard
> the technique as "unsupported", so I added a quick flag as a prototype.

An advantage to being able to stop the server is that you could have one
server processing backups for multiple PostgreSQL clusters by going
through them 1 (or more likely, 2, 4, etc) at a time, essentially
providing N+1 capability.
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)