Re: Are ZFS snapshots unsafe when PGSQL is spreading through multiple zpools?

On 1/18/23 10:54, Rob Sargent wrote:

On 1/18/23 09:38, HECTOR INGERTO wrote:

@font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0cm; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; text-decoration:underline;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}

I wanted to understand the underlying issue.

 

I use ZFS snapshots instead of a “correct” backup because with only two machines it allows me to have backups in the main machine and in the secondary too that acts as hotspare at the same time.

 

To accomplish the same I would need 3 nodes. The main, the replica hotspare and the proper backup.

Isn't "proper backup" typically thought of as offsite reloadable file capture, hopefully relatively recent?  Disaster recovery, and all that.

That is in fact what "proper backup" means.  "Hot spare" means high availability, and HA is not DR.