| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | richt(at)multera(dot)com, "J(dot) R(dot) Nield" <jrnield(at)usol(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |
| Date: | 2002-08-03 00:05:48 |
| Message-ID: | 29163.1028333148@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> writes:
>> It should be sufficient to force a checkpoint when you
>> start and when you're done --- altering normal operation in between is
>> a bad design.
> But you have to prevent log files reusing while you copy data files.
No, I don't think so. If you are using PITR then you presumably have
some process responsible for archiving off log files on a continuous
basis. The backup process should leave that normal operational behavior
in place, not muck with it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2002-08-03 00:31:04 | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |
| Previous Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2002-08-03 00:00:25 | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |