Re: Point in Time Recovery

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(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: 2004-07-29 09:34:14
Message-ID: 4108C496.2030801@coretech.co.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I was wondering about this point - might it not be just as reasonable
for the copied file to *be* an exact image of pg_control? Then a very
simple variant of pg_controldata (or maybe even just adding switches to
pg_controldata itself) would enable the relevant info to be extracted

P.s : would love to be that volunteer - however up to the eyeballs in
Business Objects (cringe) and Db2 for the next week or so....

regards

Mark

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>We need someone to code two backend functions to complete PITR.
>
>>><snippage>
>>>
>>>
>>>>However, once you decide to do things like that, there is no reason why
>>>>the copied file has to be an exact image of pg_control. I claim it
>>>>would be more useful if the copied file were plain text so that you
>>>>could just "cat" it to find out the starting WAL position; that would
>>>>let you determine without any special tools what range of WAL archive
>>>>files you are going to need to bring back from your archives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gaetano Mendola 2004-07-29 11:38:08 extra info on autovaccum log
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2004-07-29 09:24:33 Re: more signals (was: Function to kill backend)