Re: online tape backup

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Monnerie <michael(dot)monnerie(at)it-management(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: online tape backup
Date: 2007-02-13 15:34:39
Message-ID: 29978.1171380879@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Michael Monnerie <michael(dot)monnerie(at)it-management(dot)at> writes:
> From what I understand, if I run a vacuum, the WAL logs will be
> enormous, as they do not simply store the vacuum command itself, but
> every single operation done on the db.
> If that's true, running vacuum before the base backup could be better,
> as there are less WAL logs to store, making the backup smaller, right?

You're suffering from a fundamental misconception about the nature of WAL.
Vacuum doesn't "shrink WAL", and neither does anything else; WAL is a
history of every action ever taken in the database, and so a vacuum will
just add a bunch more to that history.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2007-02-13 16:08:24 Re: Is it normal for Autovacuum running continuously?
Previous Message Michael Goldner 2007-02-13 15:34:32 Is it normal for Autovacuum running continuously?