Re: block-level incremental backup
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io>
Cc: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-10T17:08:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Don't call data type input functions in GUC check hooks
- 21f428ebde39 12.0 cited
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:56 PM Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io> wrote: > Not to fork the conversation from incremental backups, but similar approach is what we have been thinking for pg_rewind. Currently, pg_rewind requires all the WAL logs to be present on source side from point of divergence to rewind. Instead just parse the wal and keep the changed blocks around on sourece. Then don't need to retain the WAL but can still rewind using the changed block map. So, rewind becomes much similar to incremental backup proposed here after performing rewind activity using target side WAL only. Interesting. So if we build a system like this for incremental backup, or for pg_rewind, the other one can use the same infrastructure. That sound excellent. I'll start a new thread to talk about that, and hopefully you and Heikki and others will chime in with thoughts. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company