Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment
От | Ron |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 72adcb8c-8f5d-2062-7669-878982cf8c4e@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment
Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 6/2/20 1:30 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Greetings, > > * Ron (ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com) wrote: >> On 6/2/20 4:59 AM, Grigory Smolkin wrote: >>> On 6/2/20 11:22 AM, Ron wrote: >>>> The inability to do a point-in-time restoration of a *single* database >>>> in a multi-db cluster is a serious -- and fundamental -- missing feature >>>> (never to be implemented because of the fundamental design). >>> It is possible via 3rd party tools like pg_probackup and pgbackrest. >> pgbackrest does *not* support PITR recovery of individual databases into >> *new* database names in the same cluster (so that the end user can have both >> the current database and an old version at the same time). > No, nothing does as PG doesn't support it as we have one WAL stream for > the entire cluster. Right. Making WAL files specific to a database should be high on the list of priorities. > Generally speaking, I discourage having lots of databases under one PG > cluster for exactly these kinds of reasons. It's just two... :) > PG's individual clusters are relatively lightweight, after all. But require a new port, and Enterprises have Processes that must be followed. -- Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: