RE: automatic restore point
От | Yotsunaga, Naoki |
---|---|
Тема | RE: automatic restore point |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8E9126CB6CE2CD42962059AB0FBF7B0DBF4976@g01jpexmbkw23 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: automatic restore point (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
RE: automatic restore point
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>-----Original Message----- >From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz] >Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 10:22 AM >This kind of thing is heavily application-dependent. For example, you would likely not care if an operator, who has newly-joinedthe team in >charge of the maintenance of this data, drops unfortunately a table which includes logs from 10years back, and you would very likely care >about a table dropped which has user's login data. My point is that you needto carefully design the shape of the configuration you would use, >so as any application's admin would be able to copewith it, for example allowing exclusion filters with regular expressions could be a good >idea to dig into. And alsoyou need to think about it so as it is backward compatible. Thanks for comments. Does that mean that the application (user) is interested in which table? For example, there are two tables A. It is ok even if one table disappears, but it is troubled if another table B disappears.So, when the table B is dropped, automatic restore point works. In the table A, automatic restore point does notwork. So, it is difficult to implement that automatic restore point in postgresql by default. Is my interpretation right? --- Naoki Yotsunaga
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: