| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mitsumasa KONDO <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup and pg_stat_tmp directory |
| Date: | 2014-01-31 17:08:41 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYaVExoeV8hvHBoS_uHWCWj=NxeaQkoN92NCy=9PPpfvg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah, I was thinking that, too. I'm not sure whether including log files
> in backup really increases the security risk, though. There are already
> very important data, i.e., database, in backups. Anyway, since
> the amount of log files can be very large and they are not essential
> for recovery, it's worth considering whether to exclude them. OTOH,
> I'm sure that some users prefer current behavior for some reasons.
> So I think that it's better to expose the pg_basebackup option
> specifying whether log files are included in backups or not.
I don't really see how this can work reliably; pg_log isn't a
hard-coded name, but rather a GUC that users can leave set to that
value or set to any other value they choose.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-01-31 17:09:00 | Re: Failure while inserting parent tuple to B-tree is not fun |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-01-31 17:00:15 | Re: [bug fix] PITR corrupts the database cluster |