| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jayadevan M <maymala(dot)jayadevan(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Point In Time Recovery |
| Date: | 2013-10-24 16:47:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1yLU90dz_9vJqxs4Nm7jj9sKNH0JbGwCW60Z0fenhxWEA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Jayadevan M <maymala(dot)jayadevan(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
> Hi,
> I went through
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/continuous-archiving.html
> and set up the archiving process. With this approach, if my database
> crashes after a couple of weeks after the base backup is taken, recovering
> would mean replaying the WAL logs for about 2 weeks, right? To avoid that,
> what is the standard process followed - take a base backup every day or
> once a week?
> Regards,
> Jayadevan
>
I restore from my base backup plus WAL quite often. It is how I get a
fresh dev or test instance when I want one. (It is also how I have
confidence that everything is working well and that I know what I'm doing
should the time come to do a real restore). When that starts to take an
annoyingly long time, I run a new base backup. How often that is, can be
anywhere from days to months, depending on what's going on in the database.
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rémi Cura | 2013-10-24 16:49:48 | Re: GIST index : order Hack : getting the order used by CLUSTER .. USING my_index |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-10-24 16:40:12 | Re: GIST index : order Hack : getting the order used by CLUSTER .. USING my_index |