| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump --snapshot |
| Date: | 2013-05-06 18:48:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HNbu5bKZPa5BTu5XNhBEbkysk2-1aysGzyUOk2fZ4QZSQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> In any case, "flashback database" is one of the most requested
> features I know of... the ability to dump the database as it appeared
> in the past *after* that point has passed.
Fwiw that's not what flashback database does. It rolls back the whole
database to that earlier point in time. it's equivalent to running
recovery but backwards in time.
Obviously if you had the ability to dump the database as of an earlier
point in time you could do a complete dump and then a complete restore
and effectively have accomplished the same thing. But that's like
calling pg_dump an incremental backup.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-05-06 19:09:47 | Re: Commit subject line |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-05-06 18:43:19 | Re: pg_dump --snapshot |