Re: PostgreSQL suitable?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com>
Cc: Kellner Thiemo <thiemo(dot)kellner(at)usb(dot)ch>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL suitable?
Date: 2017-12-19 15:40:24
Message-ID: 20171219154024.GF4628@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Greetings,

* Rakesh Kumar (rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com) wrote:
> I think with 100TB the biggest challenge will be taking backups. PG has no real incremental backups offered in Oracle or SQLServer.

There are multiple solutions to doing incremental backups with
PostgreSQL, so I'm not sure why you're saying that they don't exist,
because that's really not accurate.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2017-12-19 15:48:01 Re: PostgreSQL suitable?
Previous Message Vincenzo Romano 2017-12-19 14:58:58 Re: PostgreSQL suitable?