| From: | "John Sidney-Woollett" <johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com, "Cott Lang" <cott(at)internetstaff(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tablespaces a priority for 7.5? |
| Date: | 2004-01-22 17:30:38 |
| Message-ID: | 1405.192.168.0.64.1074792638.squirrel@mercury.wardbrook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane said:
> The planned PITR feature would not require you to take anything offline.
> The whole concept of an "offline" database is an Oracle-ism that I see
> no value in emulating.
> I dunno what a "dump file" would equate to in Postgres terms, but yeah,
> we're envisioning using ordinary filesystem tools (tar, say) as the
> mechanism for handling a baseline backup.
(I think) that was the point I was trying to make. Oracle lets you backup
while up and running (using export) OR when offline (copying db files)...
However, it looks like postgres will require a file system level backup to
recover from. Or will you be able to build a new db from the dump file,
and then apply the WAL segments?
John Sidney-Woollett
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-22 17:31:30 | Re: Lost plpgsql function |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-01-22 17:26:47 | Re: Lost plpgsql function |