| From: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Mihai Gheorghiu <tanhq(at)bigplanet(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL capabilities | 
| Date: | 2000-05-30 22:52:21 | 
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.10.10005301849510.20748-100000@spider.pilosoft.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
It means Postgres can do a reliable backup (a consistent snapshot) of a
database without shutting down the database. 
What you are asking for is replication, which is not easy to implement,
and almost damn impossible to get it RIGHT. (*curse at both Sybase and
Oracle replication servers*). (i.e. how do you resolve replication
conflicts, how do you resync databases for which you don't have
transaction logs, etc). I assume for Postgres, replication is a
possibility after WAL is implemented...
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Mihai Gheorghiu wrote:
> http://networkdna.com/database/index.html mentions that PostgreSQL is
> capable of "Online backup". What does that exactly mean?
> I'd like to be able to run a synchronization (in MS Access terms) (or
> "incremental backup"???), i.e. to have two databases in two locations,
> normally using only one of them and updating the other one. (Normal full
> backup looks unrealistic for 300MB over 1/3 of a T1.) In case the
> communication line between the two centers fails, users at the two ends
> should be able to use the local databases, and changes made during
> communication downtime be appended to the other database after communication
> resume.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cary O'Brien | 2000-05-31 01:05:45 | Re: Is PostgreSQL multi-threaded? | 
| Previous Message | Philip Hallstrom | 2000-05-30 22:49:30 | Perl interfaces? |