Re: Improving Physical Backup/Restore within the Low Level API

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Steele
Тема Re: Improving Physical Backup/Restore within the Low Level API
Дата
Msg-id df49dd6b-a06f-3fbb-ebf1-d200b9b4783f@pgmasters.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Improving Physical Backup/Restore within the Low Level API  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Improving Physical Backup/Restore within the Low Level API
Список pgsql-hackers
On 10/17/23 14:28, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 5:21 PM David G. Johnston
> <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But no, by default, and probably so far as pg_basebackup is concerned, a server crash during backup results in
requiringoutside intervention in order to get the server to restart.
 
> 
> Others may differ, but I think such a proposal is dead on arrival. As
> Laurenz says, that's just reinventing one of the main problems with
> exclusive backup mode.

I concur -- this proposal resurrects the issues we had with exclusive 
backups without solving the issues being debated elsewhere, e.g. torn 
reads of pg_control or users removing backup_label when they should not.

Regards,
-David



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: The danger of deleting backup_label
Следующее
От: Bharath Rupireddy
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible