From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Incremental backup |
Date: | 2021-10-28 20:43:10 |
Message-ID: | f09dec92-5aa4-6432-124e-7e7af874848f@aklaver.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 10/28/21 12:23, Ron wrote:
> On 10/28/21 2:06 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 10/28/21 11:48, Ron wrote:
>>> On 10/28/21 1:00 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>>>> On 10/28/21 10:51, Ron wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> "
>> Logical replication is built with an architecture similar to physical
>> streaming replication (see Section 27.2.5). It is implemented by
>> “walsender” and “apply” processes. The walsender process starts
>> logical decoding (described in Chapter 49) of the WAL and loads the
>
> Scans the (global) WAL data for only the that portion from the relevant
> database?
>
> If so, definitely not the same as having per-database WAL files.
>
> Just as importantly, replication is not, and never will be, a substitute
> for backups.
Who says you have to use the mechanism to replicate to another database,
why not to a file?
Not sure of the plausibility, still it might be interesting to find out?
Also isn't a backup just an interrupted form of replication?
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Lewis | 2021-10-28 20:44:13 | Re: Model clause and |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-10-28 20:08:53 | Re: Incremental backup |