Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com>
Cc: Richard Tucker <richt@multera.com>,
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-09T03:59:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com> writes: >> Uh, why? Why not just force a checkpoint and remember the exact >> location of the checkpoint within the current log file? > If I do a backup with PITR and save it to tape, I need to be able to > restore it even if my machine is destroyed in a fire, and all the logs > since the end of a backup are destroyed. And for your next trick, restore it even if the backup tape itself is destroyed. C'mon, be a little reasonable here. The backups and the log archive tapes are *both* critical data in any realistic view of the world. > Is the complexity really that big of a problem with this? Yes, it is. Didn't you just admit to struggling with bugs introduced by exactly this complexity?? I don't care *how* spiffy the backup scheme is, if when push comes to shove my backup doesn't restore because there was a software bug in the backup scheme. In this context there simply is not any virtue greater than "simple and reliable". regards, tom lane