| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rhhh Lin <ruanlinehan(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Backup strategy using 'wal_keep_segments' |
| Date: | 2017-10-31 12:04:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20171031120439.GS4628@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greetings,
* Rhhh Lin (ruanlinehan(at)hotmail(dot)com) wrote:
> I would actually be an advocate for using a proper archive_command in order to facilitate a proper (Per the documentation) PITR and backup strategy.
Glad to hear it.
> However, a colleague had suggested such a creative approach (Possibly, less administrative overhead, ease of maintenance? I'm not sure) and I struggled to find any evidence online in blogs/white-papers/documentation that this was a feasible approach. That said, I couldn't find any info rejecting it as a method either, which led me to post here. Essentially, this was a difference of opinion on approach, and I was looking to gather information in order to make an informed opposing argument.
I'd strongly suggest considering tried-and-true approachs instead of
coming up with something novel, particularly when it comes to backups
and recovery.
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-10-31 12:08:39 | Re: pg_audit to mask literal sql |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-10-31 10:27:58 | Re: Backup strategy using 'wal_keep_segments' |