From: | Patrick Macdonald <patrickm(at)redhat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Martin Marques <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Incremental backup |
Date: | 2003-02-13 19:54:39 |
Message-ID: | 3E4BF7FF.46CFB766@redhat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Patrick Macdonald wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > Someone at Red Hat is working on point-in-time recovery, also known as
> > > incremental backups.
> >
> > PITR and incremental backup are different beasts. PITR deals with a backup
> > + logs. Incremental backup deals with a full backup + X smaller/incremental
> > backups.
> >
> > So... it doesn't look like anyone is working on incremental backup at the
> > moment.
>
> But why would someone want incremental backups compared to PITR? The
> backup would be mixture of INSERTS, UPDATES, and DELETES, right? Seems
> pretty weird. :-)
Yeah, it's a different method of producing a similar outcome. However, many
companies do not want to be concerned with the management (and space)
of archived logs. Incremental backup allows them the option of performing
a full backup and then only backing up the modifications on a regular basis.
When it's time to restore, they'll restore the full backup and then the
proper sequence of incremental backups.
Cheers,
Patrick
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mlw | 2003-02-13 19:58:26 | Re: location of the configuration files |
Previous Message | mlw | 2003-02-13 19:51:27 | Re: location of the configuration files |