Re: PostgreSQL suitable?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com>, Kellner Thiemo <thiemo(dot)kellner(at)usb(dot)ch>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL suitable?
Date: 2017-12-19 16:39:15
Message-ID: 20171219163915.GM4628@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Greetings,

* James Keener (jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com) wrote:
> Would a storage block level incremental like zfs work?

This really depends on what you want out of your backups and just
exactly how the ZFS filesystem is set up. Remember that any backup of
PG that doesn't use PG's start/stop backup must be atomic across all
tablespaces and even then that really just allows you to bring PG back
up as of that point of the snapshot. I wouldn't recommend trying to
play WAL forward from that kind of a backup. If you use do use
pg_start/stop_backup with ZFS snapshots, and make sure to track all of
the WAL that's generated between the start/stop backup and ensure it's
reliably stored, etc, then they can work, but it's not simple.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vincenzo Romano 2017-12-19 16:54:50 Re: PostgreSQL suitable?
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2017-12-19 16:32:08 Re: PostgreSQL suitable?