Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Richard Tucker <richt@multera.com>
From: Richard Tucker <richt@multera.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-02T21:20:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:02 PM > To: J. R. Nield > Cc: Richard Tucker; Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL Hacker > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR, checkpoint, and local relations > > > "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com> writes: > > The predicate for files we MUST (fuzzy) copy is: > > File exists at start of backup && File exists at end of backup > > Right, which seems to me to negate all these claims about needing a > (horribly messy) way to read uncommitted system catalog entries, do > blind reads, etc. What's wrong with just exec'ing tar after having > done a checkpoint? You do need to make sure to backup the pg_xlog directory last and you need to make sure no wal file gets reused while backing up everything else. > > (In particular, I *strongly* object to using the buffer manager at all > for reading files for backup. That's pretty much guaranteed to blow out > buffer cache. Use plain OS-level file reads. An OS directory search > will do fine for finding what you need to read, too.) > > regards, tom lane >