| From: | Glen Parker <glenebob(at)nwlink(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: I don't want to back up index files |
| Date: | 2009-03-11 21:25:17 |
| Message-ID: | 49B82C3D.60904@nwlink.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>> Any chance of something like this being done in the future?
>>>
>> I am going to go out on a limb here and say, "no".
>
> That would probably be possible, by placing all indicies in a separate
> directory in data, but....
I could simply use the system catalog to determine which files to backup
and which to ignore. I suppose I would prefer to backup all unique
indexes, and perhaps all system indexes. It's the proliferation of
large indexes that serve only to enhance select performance that I would
want to ignore.
> So like JD said, if you don't want to dump indicies - just use pg_dump...
If pg_dump were an acceptable backup tool, we wouldn't need PITR, would
we? We used pg_dump for years. There's a very good reason we no longer
do. That suggestion is silly.
-Glen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2009-03-11 21:29:21 | Re: Enable user access from remote host |
| Previous Message | Piotre Ugrumov | 2009-03-11 20:29:18 | Re: Enable user access from remote host |