| From: | "Rakesh Kumar" <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Kellner Thiemo" <thiemo(dot)kellner(at)usb(dot)ch>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL suitable? |
| Date: | 2017-12-19 16:12:48 |
| Message-ID: | trinity-acba7d1e-51f3-4465-a57c-8a65e523bece-1513699967925@3c-app-mailcom-lxa07 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> There are multiple solutions to doing incremental backups with
> PostgreSQL, so I'm not sure why you're saying that they don't exist,
> because that's really not accurate.
PG's incremental backup is essentially WAL logs applied to a point in time. I am talking about true incremental backup where the db backs up only the changed blocks after the last full backup. In a DW system where most of the time it is append only, it makes a huge difference in backup time.
I believe there is one tool which looks at mtime/atime of each of the data file and takes the decision to back it up or lot. Not sure how robust it is.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vincenzo Romano | 2017-12-19 16:14:07 | Re: PostgreSQL suitable? |
| Previous Message | Melvin Davidson | 2017-12-19 15:51:40 | Re: Re: PostgreSQL needs percentage function |