| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Point in Time Recovery |
| Date: | 2004-07-20 03:37:07 |
| Message-ID: | 40FC9363.3060200@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I don't think so, but it seems like a much less robust way to do things.
> What happens if you have a failure partway through? For instance
> archive machine dies and loses recent data right after you've rm'd the
> source file. The recommended COPY procedure at least provides some
> breathing room between when you install the data on the archive and when
> the original file is removed.
Well, I tried it in 'cross your fingers' mode and it works, at least:
archive_command = 'rm %p'
:)
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-07-20 03:50:49 | Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-20 02:54:11 | Re: Point in Time Recovery |