Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
От | J. R. Nield |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1028321114.1264.4.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2002-08-02 at 16:01, Tom Lane wrote: > "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? > There is no need to read uncommitted system catalog entries. Just take a snapshot of the directory to get the OID's. You don't care whether the get deleted before you get to them, because the log will take care of that. > (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.) How do you get atomic block copies otherwise? > > regards, tom lane > -- J. R. Nield jrnield@usol.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: