Re: Backup strategy using 'wal_keep_segments'

From: Rhhh Lin <ruanlinehan(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Backup strategy using 'wal_keep_segments'
Date: 2017-10-24 00:08:55
Message-ID: DB6PR1001MB114103DDF216C69D0361BFA5AE470@DB6PR1001MB1141.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks very much for your reply Michael.

I note that it looks like pgbarman employs pg_receivexlog; I will check it out.

Regards,

Ruan

________________________________
From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Sent: 22 October 2017 22:17:01
To: Rhhh Lin
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Backup strategy using 'wal_keep_segments'

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Rhhh Lin <ruanlinehan(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is this approach feasible? Assuming obviously, we have sufficient disk space
> to facilitate 1000 WAL files etc.

You expose yourself to race conditions with such methods if a
checkpoint has the bad idea to recycle past segments that your logic
is copying. So I would advise to not do that. Instead of using the
archive command, you should also consider using pg_receivexlog
combined with a replication slot. This brings way more control with
the error handling.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Geoff Winkless 2017-10-24 09:58:18 Re: multiple sql results to shell
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-10-23 22:43:30 Re: Two versions of an extension in the same cluster?