The technique Jeff is speaking of below is exactly how we do it,
except we use file-system snapshots vs rsync.
The problem is how slow log application is when recovering since it's
a single process, and very slow at that.
-kg
On Jan 26, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Jeff wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 2009, at 2:42 PM, David Rees wrote:
>>
>> Lots of people have databases much, much, bigger - I'd hate to
>> imagine
>> have to restore from backup from one of those monsters.
>>
>
> If you use PITR + rsync you can create a binary snapshot of the db,
> so restore time is simply how long it takes to untar / whatever it
> into place. Our backup script basically does:
>
> archive backup directory
> pg_start_backup
> rsync
> pg_stop_backup
>
> voila. I have 2 full copies of the db. You could even expand it a
> bit and after the rsync & friends have it fire up the instance and
> run pg_dump against it for a pg_restore compatible dump "just in
> case".
>
> It takes a long time to restore a 300GB db, even if you cheat and
> parallelify some of it. 8.4 may get a pg_restore that can load in
> parallel - which will help somewhat.
>
> --
> Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
> http://www.stuarthamm.net/
> http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> )
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance