From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, eivind(dot)arnesen(at)netcom(dot)no |
Subject: | Re: Point in time recovery? |
Date: | 2003-03-24 21:06:46 |
Message-ID: | 1048540006.13853.353.camel@camel |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2003-03-24 at 12:13, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 10:25:29AM +0000, eivind(dot)arnesen(at)netcom(dot)no wrote:
> > In order to recommend and support PostgreSQL, we need to make sure
> > that our data will be safe using PostgreSQL.
>
> [. . .]
>
> > to load the last backup from pg_dump. However, what about transactions
> > that has occured after the last backup? Would we be able to roll
> > forward to a particular point in time, so that the chances for data
> > loss is minimal? I've heard that this feature is currently missing,
> > but that it will be introduced in version 7.4 which should be out this
> > year.
> >
> > My problem is that we cannot recommend this product unless this feature
> > is present.
>
<snip good suggestions on replication>
ISTM that this thread misses the state of how resilient postgresql is to
data corruption in the first place. Problems like power outages and
server crashes (at either the os/kernel/application level) are almost
certainly not going to cause data loss. I could see possible issues with
hardware problems, but quality ram and raid can go a long way toward
minimizing these risks. While I suppose it's not 100%, nothing ever is.
Robert Treat
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Ayers | 2003-03-24 21:08:39 | Re: TEXT datatype and VB6... |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-24 20:58:25 | Re: fairly current mysql v postgresql comparison need for |