Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
Cc: richt@multera.com, "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-03T00:44:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes: >> No, I don't think so. If you are using PITR then you presumably have >> some process responsible for archiving off log files on a continuous >> basis. The backup process should leave that normal >> operational behavior in place, not muck with it. > Well, PITR without log archiving could be alternative to > pg_dump/pg_restore, but I agreed that it's not the big > feature to worry about. Seems like a pointless "feature" to me. A pg_dump dump serves just as well to capture a snapshot --- in fact better, since it's likely smaller, definitely more portable, amenable to selective restore, etc. I think we should design the PITR dump to do a good job for PITR, not a poor job of both PITR and pg_dump. regards, tom lane