Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
От | Doug McNaught |
---|---|
Тема | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m38yu96pwc.fsf@varsoon.wireboard.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") ("Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Ben Clewett <B.Clewett@roadrunner.uk.com> writes: > > So does PostgreSQL (pg_dump/pg_dumpall). > > I have used this, and it's a great command. > > I could not work out from the documentation whether it takes a > snapshot at the start time, or archives data at the time it find's it. > The documentation (app-pg-dump.html). As the documentation does not > clarify this very important point, I desided it's not safe to use when > the system is in use. Ummm, quoting from the pg_dump manpage: pg_dump makes consistent backups even if the database is being used concurrently. pg_dump does not block other users accessing the database (readers or writers). What part of this isn't clear? It's safe. pg_dump does all its work inside a transaction, so MVCC rules automatically guarantee that it sees a consistent snapshot. > Can this command can be used, with users in the system making heavy > changes, and when takes many hours to complete, does produce a valid > and consistent backup? Absolutely. > If so, you have all MySQL has here and in a more useful format. I think MySQL's consistent hot backup has to lock tables, while PG's doesn't... -Doug
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: