From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Rama Krishnan <raghuldrag(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: About rsync |
Date: | 2024-03-11 10:36:30 |
Message-ID: | Ze7erv8M+EXS3yo3@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greetings,
* Rama Krishnan (raghuldrag(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> I have primary and stand by setup in that customer using wal_keep_segment
> very low number and database size were also high so that cilent asking with
> me in order use pgbase backup can't we use rsyn
>
> Here my question is if the wal is is presented on primary and not in
> standby then rsync will work but if the wal files were missed at primary if
> I am using rsync to the db will be work here please explain me
Not really following what's being asked here, but one thing that I can
certainly say is that rsync, by itself, is not an acceptable solution
for performing online backups of PostgreSQL.
I'd strongly suggest you continue to use pg_basebackup or look into a
more advanced tool like pgBackRest if you need a backup solution for
PostgreSQL.
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michał Kłeczek | 2024-03-11 10:41:19 | Pgxs - How to reference another extension |
Previous Message | Tony Shelver | 2024-03-11 10:27:18 | Fwd: Performance (and general) considerations between views and functions |