| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Paul Silveira <plabrh1(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: snapshot replication with pg_dump |
| Date: | 2006-08-21 13:57:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20060821135721.GD24375@svana.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 06:40:22AM -0700, Paul Silveira wrote:
>
> Yes the needs are simple. I was also thinking about using DBI. The most
> important thing to me is that everything is kept in a transaction so that
> users can still read the data while I'm snapshotting it at the same time.
> If my transaction is isolated from all the reads happening, then it
> shouldn't matter how long it takes for me to move the data over (granted,
> that will increase latency, but in this project that's not really too
> sensitive) and it will be transparent to the end users.
Looks to me like the -c option to pg_dump should do what you want.
<snip>
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2006-08-21 13:57:43 | Fix linking of OpenLDAP libraries |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2006-08-21 13:43:20 | Re: PostgreSQL on 64 bit Linux |