From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe(at)qwest(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Do we need more emphasis on backup? |
Date: | 2004-06-23 06:39:49 |
Message-ID: | 28035.1087972789@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe(at)qwest(dot)net> writes:
> I'm wondering if there's some basic failing in how we're presenting
> backing up the database on a regular basis.
> Maybe even our reputation for reliability hurts a bit here.
I have definitely noticed that a very large percentage of the data-loss
problems we've seen reported lately seem to trace to hardware problems.
Postgres is more reliable than consumer-grade PC hardware. (And is that
ever a change from when I started working with it ... but I digress.)
We do need to point out that you're only as reliable as your last
backup. I'm not sure exactly where to say this.
> Now, the SQL documentation set has a tutorial that proceeds it that
> really is a great walk through on the features of PostgreSQL, and I was
> wondering if we needed an administrative walk through in a similar vein?
> It could include load generation scripts written in Perl or PHP or
> something like that to populate and exercise the database for
> demonstration purposes.
Hm, that seems a bit far afield from the problem...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kreißl, Karsten | 2004-06-23 07:03:37 | Re: User Privileges using dblink |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-23 06:22:15 | Re: Datatype sizes; a space and speed issue? |