Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Vadim Mikheev <vmikheev@sectorbase.com>
From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: richt@multera.com, "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-03T01:07:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > 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. But pg_restore probably will take longer time than copy data files back and re-apply log. > 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. As I already said - agreed -:) Vadim