From: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Barman versus pgBackRest |
Date: | 2018-09-04 11:41:36 |
Message-ID: | 0eb45bab-8ff7-7255-f052-951edd09b804@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 03/09/2018 08:56 AM, David Steele wrote:
[snip]
>> About pgBarman, I like :
>> - be able restore on a remote server from the backup server
> This a good feature, and one that has been requested for pgBackRest. You
> can do this fairly trivially with ssh, however, so it generally hasn't
> been a big deal for people. Is there a particular reason you need this
> feature?
(Sorry to dredge up this old thread.)
Do you just change the IP address of the "restore target"?
>> - use replication slots for backingup wal on the backup server.
> Another good feature. We have not added it yet because pgBackRest was
> originally written for very high-volume clusters (100K+ WAL per day) and
> our parallel async feature answers that need much better. We recommend
> a replicated standby for more update-to-date data.
Every N minutes you copy the WAL files to the backup server?
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Poty | 2018-09-04 12:14:53 | Re: Barman versus pgBackRest |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-09-04 01:08:07 | Re: WARNING: could not flush dirty data: Function not implemented |