Re: PITR Questions

From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com>
To: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Chander Ganesan <chander(at)otg-nc(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PITR Questions
Date: 2006-08-09 19:15:38
Message-ID: C0FF907A.52193%scott_ribe@killerbytes.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> I don't see how checkpoint_timeout is relevant. Just because we
> checkpoint doesn't mean the WAL file will get archived. I have to have
> 16M of WAL traffic before a file gets archived regardless of
> check-pointing, or am I missing something?

Right, I think ;-) If you want finer-grained backup, you have to do
something like rsync the current WAL file frequently.

--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message louis gonzales 2006-08-09 19:25:53 Re: Tuning to speed select
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2006-08-09 19:13:35 Re: PL/pgSQL Problem