From: | "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Incremental backups, and backup history |
Date: | 2003-06-19 08:50:46 |
Message-ID: | 3EF1C6BE.10966.AC878D8@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 19 Jun 2003 at 11:42, Antonios Christofides wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two backup questions, not much related to each other; here they
> are.
>
> First: With PostgreSQL, I can't do incremental backups. pg_dump will
> dump the entire database. Thus, if I want to keep daily backups on tape,
> I'm in trouble because I'll have to do a full backup every day, which
> may need several hours and several tapes.
>
> One workaround I'm thinking is to not store BLOBs in the database, but
> store them in the filesystem and store the filenames in the database
> instead. This needs some additional work (for example, a garbage
> collector to periodically delete unreferenced files), but will move a
> large amount of space from the database into the filesystem, which is
> capable of incremental backups. Only BLOBs, that is; for some tables
> that will have several tens of millions of small rows, I can't think of
> any workaround.
A cheaper solution in terms of efforts is to add a latest update timestamp to
each blob and dump with a custom SQL.
Incremental backups would be real nice. If you have real high turnover, I would
suggest you to look asynchornous replication solution which work based on WAL
sengmenting. That way you would backup only things that are changed.
HTH
Bye
Shridhar
--
Blore's Razor: Given a choice between two theories, take the one which is
funnier.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-06-19 09:07:39 | Re: PostgreSQL alternative to "Oracle Real Application |
Previous Message | Antonios Christofides | 2003-06-19 08:42:28 | Incremental backups, and backup history |