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>, "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
Cc: "J. R. Nield" <jrnield@usol.com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-07T15:12:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 8:06 PM
> To: Mikheev, Vadim
> Cc: richt@multera.com; J. R. Nield; Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL Hacker
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
>
>
> "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
> >> It should be sufficient to force a checkpoint when you
> >> start and when you're done --- altering normal operation in between is
> >> a bad design.
>
> > But you have to prevent log files reusing while you copy data files.
>
> 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.
You want the log files necessary for recovering the database to be in the
backup copy -- don't you?
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>