Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations

From: Richard Tucker <richt(at)multera(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "J(dot) R(dot) Nield" <jrnield(at)usol(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Date: 2002-08-02 21:20:25
Message-ID: EKEKLEKKLDAEEKDBDMMAEEGDCDAA.richt@multera.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:02 PM
> To: J. R. Nield
> Cc: Richard Tucker; Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL Hacker
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
>
>
> "J. R. Nield" <jrnield(at)usol(dot)com> writes:
> > The predicate for files we MUST (fuzzy) copy is:
> > File exists at start of backup && File exists at end of backup
>
> Right, which seems to me to negate all these claims about needing a
> (horribly messy) way to read uncommitted system catalog entries, do
> blind reads, etc. What's wrong with just exec'ing tar after having
> done a checkpoint?
You do need to make sure to backup the pg_xlog directory last and you need
to make sure no wal file gets reused while backing up everything else.
>
> (In particular, I *strongly* object to using the buffer manager at all
> for reading files for backup. That's pretty much guaranteed to blow out
> buffer cache. Use plain OS-level file reads. An OS directory search
> will do fine for finding what you need to read, too.)
>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-08-02 21:25:28 Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Previous Message J. R. Nield 2002-08-02 21:12:20 Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations