Re: incremental backups
От | Rick Gigger |
---|---|
Тема | Re: incremental backups |
Дата | |
Msg-id | A2D53AB0-042D-43E3-A0BE-F40137275C0F@alpinenetworking.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: incremental backups (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: incremental backups
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Jan 30, 2006, at 6:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Rick Gigger <rick@alpinenetworking.com> writes: >> And here is the real million dollar question. Let's say for some >> reason I don't have the last WAL file I need for my backup to be >> valid. Will it die and tell me it's bad or will it just start up >> with a screwed up data directory? > > It'll restore up to the end of the data it has. The only case that's > actually "invalid" is not restoring far enough to cover the time > window > that the original base backup was taken over. Otherwise it's just a > situation of restoring up to a particular point in time... > That's what I mean by invalid. Let's say I do something stupid and do a physical backup and I don't grab the current WAL file. All I have is the last one to be archived before I did my backup, which is not late enough to do a valid restore. Will postgres know that the restore process failed because I didn't have that last necessary WAL file or will it just start up in a potentially inconsistent state. Obviously that would be my fault not postgres' since I am the one that didn't give it the data it needed to do a full restore. But I am just wondering if that is a potential area to shoot yourself in the foot or if postgres will put the safety on for me. Rick
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: