Re: Barman versus pgBackRest

From: Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Barman versus pgBackRest
Date: 2018-09-04 15:51:40
Message-ID: ca6d9035-dbcf-007c-bd9a-9ea167b2a3a9@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 09/04/2018 10:24 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 09/04/2018 07:52 AM, Ron wrote:
>> On 09/04/2018 09:24 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> On 09/04/2018 07:14 AM, Ron wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That was about barman, in the barman group.  This is asking about
>>>> pgbackrest...  :)
>>>>
>>>> So: does pgbackrest have this ability which barman does not have? The
>>>> "--db-include" option seems to indicate that you can restore a single
>>>> db, but does indicate whether or not you can rename it.
>>>
>>> https://pgbackrest.org/configuration.html#section-restore/option-db-include
>>>
>>
>> Which implies that you can't do it?
>
> You can restore a single database and then issue a simple ALTER DATABASE
> command to change the DB name.
>
>>
>> (Postgres backup/restore capabilities are quite limited, which is
>> disapointing.)
>
> Not sure I agree with that. If you want to restore and then rename a DB,
> rename it.
>
> ALTER DATABASE foo RENAME TO bar;

But restoring an old "foo" overwrites the existing "foo".  On SQL Server
databases, we occasionally need to restore an old foo backup "foo_old" along
side production foo.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2018-09-04 15:51:51 Re: Barman versus pgBackRest
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2018-09-04 15:25:47 Re: increasing HA