Re: File system snapshots for multiple file systems
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: File system snapshots for multiple file systems |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47FBC9DF.7050107@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: File system snapshots for multiple file systems (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> What I was complaining/suggesting is that we should make what you did to >> actually work, because it's a lot simpler. And as Jonah pointed out, >> we'd need to inhibit checkpoints between pg_start_backup() and >> pg_stop_backup() to make it work. > > I don't think that follows --- what you'd need is to prevent the > checkpoints from removing/recycling old WAL files, but you can still > allow a checkpoint to occur. Any subsequent recovery from the backup > would need to replay from the checkpoint identified by the backup label > file anyway. I was thinking that the restore would be a normal non-PITR recovery, but if we do it as a PITR restore, that's true. > Whether it's a good idea or not is a bit debatable though. I'm > concerned about the WAL partition filling up (--> PANIC), especially > if you forget to pg_stop_backup after getting your backup. Yep, that would suck. We already have that problem if you set up continuous archiving, and archive_command starts failing, don't we? As a simple safeguard, we could have user-settable max. number of segments, and give up on the backup after that. Though failing the backup isn't nice either.. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: