Re: a back up question

From: Carl Karsten <carl(at)personnelware(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Martin Mueller <martinmueller(at)northwestern(dot)edu>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: a back up question
Date: 2017-12-05 22:51:28
Message-ID: CADmzSShOuFvNJ9qGp3tiNpYJ-Gews1AfeM-D+cdR9m7Ryhub9Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:

> Carl Karsten wrote:
> > Nothing wrong with lots of tables and data.
> >
> > Don't impose any constraints on your problem you don't need to.
> >
> > Like what are you backing up to? $400 for a 1T ssd or $80 fo a 2T usb3
> > spinny disk.
> >
> > If you are backing up while the db is being updated, you need to make
> sure
> > updates are queued until the backup is done. don't mess with that
> > process. personally I would assume the db is always being updated and
> > expect that.
>
> A backup generated by pg_dump never includes writes that are in flight
> while the backup is being taken. That would make the backup absolutely
> worthless!
>

Hmm, i kinda glossed over my point:
if you come up with your own process to chop up the backup into little
pieces, you risk letting writes in, and then yeah, worthless.

--
Carl K

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John R Pierce 2017-12-05 22:55:41 Re: a back up question
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2017-12-05 22:20:34 Re: a back up question