Обсуждение: Online backup vs Continuous backup
I noticed that we are using the term "Online Backup" in our documentation when we are talking about continuous backup and PITR. To me, "online backup" is doing a backup while the system is online (online-backup), and that is accomplished by pg_dump. I know a lot of databases us "Online Backup" but I assume this is for historical reasons because at some time in the past their full backups didn't work while the database was online. Other systems use the term "Continuous Logging", but I think that is too easily confused with the server activity logs. I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous Backup". -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 Index: backup.sgml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml,v retrieving revision 2.76 diff -c -r2.76 backup.sgml *** backup.sgml 7 Nov 2005 17:36:44 -0000 2.76 --- backup.sgml 26 Dec 2005 16:30:48 -0000 *************** *** 19,25 **** <itemizedlist> <listitem><para><acronym>SQL</> dump</para></listitem> <listitem><para>File system level backup</para></listitem> ! <listitem><para>On-line backup</para></listitem> </itemizedlist> Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. </para> --- 19,25 ---- <itemizedlist> <listitem><para><acronym>SQL</> dump</para></listitem> <listitem><para>File system level backup</para></listitem> ! <listitem><para>Continuous backup</para></listitem> </itemizedlist> Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. </para> *************** *** 373,382 **** </sect1> <sect1 id="backup-online"> ! <title>On-line backup and point-in-time recovery (PITR)</title> <indexterm zone="backup"> ! <primary>on-line backup</primary> </indexterm> <indexterm zone="backup"> --- 373,382 ---- </sect1> <sect1 id="backup-online"> ! <title>Continuous backup and point-in-time recovery (PITR)</title> <indexterm zone="backup"> ! <primary>continuous backup</primary> </indexterm> <indexterm zone="backup"> *************** *** 452,458 **** </para> <para> ! To recover successfully using an on-line backup, you need a continuous sequence of archived WAL files that extends back at least as far as the start time of your backup. So to get started, you should set up and test your procedure for archiving WAL files <emphasis>before</> you take your --- 452,458 ---- </para> <para> ! To recover successfully using a continuous backup, you need a continuous sequence of archived WAL files that extends back at least as far as the start time of your backup. So to get started, you should set up and test your procedure for archiving WAL files <emphasis>before</> you take your *************** *** 782,793 **** <function>pg_start_backup</> or <function>pg_stop_backup</>, and you will therefore be left to your own devices to keep track of which backup dump is which and how far back the associated WAL files go. ! It is generally better to follow the on-line backup procedure above. </para> </sect2> <sect2 id="backup-pitr-recovery"> ! <title>Recovering with an On-line Backup</title> <para> Okay, the worst has happened and you need to recover from your backup. --- 782,793 ---- <function>pg_start_backup</> or <function>pg_stop_backup</>, and you will therefore be left to your own devices to keep track of which backup dump is which and how far back the associated WAL files go. ! It is generally better to follow the continuous backup procedure above. </para> </sect2> <sect2 id="backup-pitr-recovery"> ! <title>Recovering with a Continuous Backup</title> <para> Okay, the worst has happened and you need to recover from your backup. *************** *** 1123,1129 **** <title>Caveats</title> <para> ! At this writing, there are several limitations of the on-line backup technique. These will probably be fixed in future releases: <itemizedlist> --- 1123,1129 ---- <title>Caveats</title> <para> ! At this writing, there are several limitations of the continuous backup technique. These will probably be fixed in future releases: <itemizedlist>
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous
> Backup".
This doesn't seem like an improvement. "Online backup" is the standard
terminology AFAIK.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous > > Backup". > > This doesn't seem like an improvement. "Online backup" is the standard > terminology AFAIK. But why is it the standard terminology? It doesn't seem logical. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian wrote: > I noticed that we are using the term "Online Backup" in our > documentation when we are talking about continuous backup and PITR. > > To me, "online backup" is doing a backup while the system is online > (online-backup), and that is accomplished by pg_dump. I know a lot of > databases us "Online Backup" but I assume this is for historical reasons > because at some time in the past their full backups didn't work while > the database was online. Other systems use the term "Continuous > Logging", but I think that is too easily confused with the server > activity logs. > > I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous > Backup". I have never heard the term Continuous backup. Although I have heard online backup. The problem is that when I hear the term online backup I think Hot backup which is what we do with pg_dump. I would just call the other Point in time recovery :) > >
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I noticed that we are using the term "Online Backup" in our > > documentation when we are talking about continuous backup and PITR. > > > > To me, "online backup" is doing a backup while the system is online > > (online-backup), and that is accomplished by pg_dump. I know a lot of > > databases us "Online Backup" but I assume this is for historical reasons > > because at some time in the past their full backups didn't work while > > the database was online. Other systems use the term "Continuous > > Logging", but I think that is too easily confused with the server > > activity logs. > > > > I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous > > Backup". > > I have never heard the term Continuous backup. Although I have heard > online backup. The problem is that when I hear the term online backup > I think Hot backup which is what we do with pg_dump. Yes, that is my problem too. > I would just call the other Point in time recovery :) The problem there is that it is "recovery", and the documentation talks about the "backup" step. I am thinking we are going to have to add something like "Continuous backup, also called Online Backup" or something like that. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> I have never heard the term Continuous backup. Although I have heard >> online backup. The problem is that when I hear the term online backup >> I think Hot backup which is what we do with pg_dump. > > Yes, that is my problem too. > >> I would just call the other Point in time recovery :) > > The problem there is that it is "recovery", and the documentation talks > about the "backup" step. I am thinking we are going to have to add > something like "Continuous backup, also called Online Backup" or > something like that. FWIW, I believe "log archival" is a common term for that. - Heikki
Am Montag, 26. Dezember 2005 20:46 schrieb Heikki Linnakangas: > FWIW, I believe "log archival" is a common term for that. I like that better, although there are a lot of logs, so maybe "transaction log archival". Considering the list originally referenced: - File system backup - SQL dump - (Transaction log archival?) This addresses the technical workings of the various backup systems. The fact that it is or isn't on-line, hot, continuous, fast, or flexible is secondary.
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Montag, 26. Dezember 2005 20:46 schrieb Heikki Linnakangas: > > FWIW, I believe "log archival" is a common term for that. > > I like that better, although there are a lot of logs, so maybe > "transaction log archival". Yep, when I think of log archiving, I think of saving the server logs, which thanks to log file rotation, we kind of support. The problem is that when I think of the transaction log, I think of clog because it is the transaction status log. :-( I am thinking anything that says "log" is going to be confusing. How about "Transaction Archiving"? > Considering the list originally referenced: > > - File system backup - SQL dump - (Transaction log archival?) > > This addresses the technical workings of the various backup systems. > The fact that it is or isn't on-line, hot, continuous, fast, or flexible > is secondary. To me, the continuous activity is the significant feature of that backup method. I chose "Continuous Backup" because it is the continual activity that is significant. "Continuous Archiving"? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > I noticed that we are using the term "Online Backup" in our > documentation when we are talking about continuous backup and PITR. > > To me, "online backup" is doing a backup while the system is online > (online-backup), and that is accomplished by pg_dump. Well fwiw what pg_dump does isn't even considered a "backup" at all in other systems. It's a "logical export" or something of that sort. It's not considered a "backup" because it's saving something different than the actual physical database. When you restore you get something (hopefully) logically equivalent but still physically different. Hot backups which is what you read "online backup" to mean is pretty closely tied to PITR log archiving backups. One isn't very useful without the other. Specifically, you can have all the archived logs in the world but if you don't have a backup to start from they're useless. And in postgres I gather hot backups aren't very useful if you don't have the transaction logs necessary to fix any torn pages. -- greg
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> This addresses the technical workings of the various backup systems.
>> The fact that it is or isn't on-line, hot, continuous, fast, or flexible
>> is secondary.
> To me, the continuous activity is the significant feature of that backup
> method. I chose "Continuous Backup" because it is the continual
> activity that is significant. "Continuous Archiving"?
I like Peter's suggestion as-is; or "WAL Archiving". I don't like
applying adjectives that are not specific to the particular method.
That will just create more confusion down the road if we add another
feature that could also be called "continuous archiving".
regards, tom lane
Greg Stark said: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > >> I noticed that we are using the term "Online Backup" in our >> documentation when we are talking about continuous backup and PITR. >> >> To me, "online backup" is doing a backup while the system is online >> (online-backup), and that is accomplished by pg_dump. > > Well fwiw what pg_dump does isn't even considered a "backup" at all in > other systems. It's a "logical export" or something of that sort. > > It's not considered a "backup" because it's saving something different > than the actual physical database. When you restore you get something > (hopefully) logically equivalent but still physically different. This seems fairly arbitrary. On that basis anything on a higher level than dd is not a backup method, ISTM. cheers andrew
"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Greg Stark said: > > Well fwiw what pg_dump does isn't even considered a "backup" at all in > > other systems. It's a "logical export" or something of that sort. > > > > It's not considered a "backup" because it's saving something different > > than the actual physical database. When you restore you get something > > (hopefully) logically equivalent but still physically different. > > This seems fairly arbitrary. On that basis anything on a higher level than > dd is not a backup method, ISTM. Well most of other options *aren't* any higher level than dd. Even with PITR you're just storing the transaction logs byte for byte. When you replay it works at slightly higher level but it's still far from reinterpreting your data and you'll get (almost) exactly the same bytes back. I'm not saying pg_dump is a bad thing, but now that Postgres has real backups there isn't much of a use case for using pg_dump as a stand-in for backups. If your system crashes and you need to bring up a new system quickly you want to bring it up in exactly the state the one that crashed was in. You don't want to pass all the data through a program that interprets the ascii representation again and hope it comes up with the same data. There are other reasons to need pg_dump of course. Just not for backups. -- greg
Hi there, How can i send mail form postgresql. any suggestion. thanx & regards aftab
Hello, it depend on your possibilities. Simply, use PL/Perl or PL/sh. Regards Pavel Stehule or use PgSendMail http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=35804 > >Hi there, > >How can i send mail form postgresql. > >any suggestion. > >thanx & regards >aftab > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend _________________________________________________________________ Citite se osamele? Poznejte nekoho vyjmecneho diky Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/
Code from perl cookbook, wrapped in plperlu wrapper not very portable, Net::SMTP would probably be better, and result in more portable perl code. Didn't test this - but it is copied straight from perl cookbook via google: http://www.unix.org.ua/orelly/perl/cookbook/ch18_04.htm CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION send_email(from_address text, to_address text,subject text, body text) RETURNS void AS $$ use Mail::Mailer; my ($from_address, $to_address, $subject, $body) = @_; my $mailer = Mail::Mailer->new("sendmail"); $mailer->open({ From => $from_address, To => $to_address, Subject => $subject, }) or die "Can't open: $!"; print $mailer $body; $mailer->close(); $$ LANGUAGE plperlu VOLATILE STRICT; On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Aftab Alam wrote: > Hi there, > > How can i send mail form postgresql. > > any suggestion. > > thanx & regards > aftab > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend > -- Don't steal; thou'lt never thus compete successfully in business. Cheat. -- Ambrose Bierce
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 08:52:41AM +0530, Aftab Alam wrote: > Hi there, > > How can i send mail form postgresql. Generally, it is a better idea either to poll your PostgreSQL database and send mail based on that, or use LISTEN/NOTIFY, rather than directly sending mail from your database. Cheers, D -- David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote!
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 13:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous
> > > Backup".
> >
> > This doesn't seem like an improvement. "Online backup" is the standard
> > terminology AFAIK.
>
> But why is it the standard terminology? It doesn't seem logical.
Well, as Greg says its a physical backup that can be done on-line, so
online backup makes perfect sense to me. I've never had somebody say
"that makes no sense" before. Nomenclature is different everywhere, I
accept.
I generally describe it like this:
Logical Backup
- use pg_dump - must be done on-line
Physical Backup
All file copy only
- must be Cold/Off-line backup
All file copy + WAL archiving
- allows Hot/Online or Cold/Offline backup
People understand those terms...
When do I mention PITR? Well, I describe this as Archive Recovery, with
an option to go to end-of-logs, or to a point-in-time.
[In the code, the mode variable is InArchiveRecovery.]
I do think that saying "do you use PITR?" makes little sense. We should
be talking about the backup mode, not the potential future recovery
mode.
I think it would all make more sense if we described the use of
archive_command = something as being in "WAL Archive Mode". That would
then allow us to say:
"You can only take Online Backups while in WAL Archive Mode".
"If you ever wish to perform PITR, you must use WAL Archive Mode".
"If you backed-up in WAL Archive Mode, you can perform an Archive
Recovery".
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
How about: use "Online backup" or "Hot backup" to refer to either method of back since they are both done while the system is online or hot. If you want to get specific refer to doing a "sql dump" etc for using pg_dump Then use "Incremental backup" to refer to the whole process of the WAL archival etc Refer to the actual log files themselves as transaction logs. That all seems to be pretty intuitive and non-ambiguous non-confusing to me. On Dec 26, 2005, at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: >> I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous >> Backup". > > This doesn't seem like an improvement. "Online backup" is the > standard > terminology AFAIK. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org >
> I think it would all make more sense if we described the use of > archive_command = something as being in "WAL Archive Mode". That would > then allow us to say: > "You can only take Online Backups while in WAL Archive Mode". > "If you ever wish to perform PITR, you must use WAL Archive Mode". > "If you backed-up in WAL Archive Mode, you can perform an Archive > Recovery". It seems to me there are two different context in which one would be making statements like this. And what we are "allowed to say" depends greatly on context. These contexts are as follows: 1) Explaining the feature set of postgres to a potential user. 2) Explaining to an actual postgres user how to actually do something. In the first case it makes the most sense to me to use industry standard or very intuitive terminology to the extend that it exists. ie (Transaction Logs vs. WAL). Incremental Backup and Point in Time Recovery seem to be fairly commonly used and understood database buzzwords for someone to investigate the feature set of an RDBMS. In the second case it seems to me that the most important thing is that you pick terminology that is consistent, unambiguous and clearly defined. Log archival, PITR, etc are not point and click operations like they are in say MS SQL Server. This gives us more flexibility but it also requires a deeper understanding. If someone is unwilling or unable to to learn whatever terminology you happen to come up with then it seems to me they shouldn't even be attempting to set up one of those features. At the same time if the terminology you uses changes all the time (is not consistent), or if you can't figure out what any of the terms mean (they are not clearly defined) or if you use terms like "online backup" to mean both types of backup but then use it once in a specific circumstance where only one usage is appropriate (you are using the terms ambiguously) then users will be confused and it will be your fault not theirs. Just my 2 cents Rick Gigger
I used your suggestion and renamed "online backup" to "incremental backup", and added a mention that many database vendors call it "online backup". Patch attached. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rick Gigger wrote: > How about: > > use "Online backup" or "Hot backup" to refer to either method of back > since they are both done while the system is online or hot. > > If you want to get specific refer to doing a "sql dump" etc for using > pg_dump > Then use "Incremental backup" to refer to the whole process of the > WAL archival etc > Refer to the actual log files themselves as transaction logs. > > That all seems to be pretty intuitive and non-ambiguous non-confusing > to me. > > On Dec 26, 2005, at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > >> I suggest the following patch to rename our capability "Continuous > >> Backup". > > > > This doesn't seem like an improvement. "Online backup" is the > > standard > > terminology AFAIK. > > > > regards, tom lane > > > > ---------------------------(end of > > broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 Index: doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml,v retrieving revision 2.76 diff -c -c -r2.76 backup.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml 7 Nov 2005 17:36:44 -0000 2.76 --- doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml 14 Feb 2006 04:00:50 -0000 *************** *** 19,25 **** <itemizedlist> <listitem><para><acronym>SQL</> dump</para></listitem> <listitem><para>File system level backup</para></listitem> ! <listitem><para>On-line backup</para></listitem> </itemizedlist> Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. </para> --- 19,25 ---- <itemizedlist> <listitem><para><acronym>SQL</> dump</para></listitem> <listitem><para>File system level backup</para></listitem> ! <listitem><para>Incremental backup</para></listitem> </itemizedlist> Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. </para> *************** *** 372,382 **** </para> </sect1> ! <sect1 id="backup-online"> ! <title>On-line backup and point-in-time recovery (PITR)</title> <indexterm zone="backup"> ! <primary>on-line backup</primary> </indexterm> <indexterm zone="backup"> --- 372,382 ---- </para> </sect1> ! <sect1 id="backup-incremental"> ! <title>Incremental backup and point-in-time recovery (PITR)</title> <indexterm zone="backup"> ! <primary>incremental backup</primary> </indexterm> <indexterm zone="backup"> *************** *** 452,458 **** </para> <para> ! To recover successfully using an on-line backup, you need a continuous sequence of archived WAL files that extends back at least as far as the start time of your backup. So to get started, you should set up and test your procedure for archiving WAL files <emphasis>before</> you take your --- 452,459 ---- </para> <para> ! To recover successfully using an incremental backup (also called "online ! backup" by many database vendors), you need a continuous sequence of archived WAL files that extends back at least as far as the start time of your backup. So to get started, you should set up and test your procedure for archiving WAL files <emphasis>before</> you take your *************** *** 782,793 **** <function>pg_start_backup</> or <function>pg_stop_backup</>, and you will therefore be left to your own devices to keep track of which backup dump is which and how far back the associated WAL files go. ! It is generally better to follow the on-line backup procedure above. </para> </sect2> <sect2 id="backup-pitr-recovery"> ! <title>Recovering with an On-line Backup</title> <para> Okay, the worst has happened and you need to recover from your backup. --- 783,794 ---- <function>pg_start_backup</> or <function>pg_stop_backup</>, and you will therefore be left to your own devices to keep track of which backup dump is which and how far back the associated WAL files go. ! It is generally better to follow the incremental backup procedure above. </para> </sect2> <sect2 id="backup-pitr-recovery"> ! <title>Recovering with an Incremental Backup</title> <para> Okay, the worst has happened and you need to recover from your backup. *************** *** 1119,1129 **** </para> </sect2> ! <sect2 id="backup-online-caveats"> <title>Caveats</title> <para> ! At this writing, there are several limitations of the on-line backup technique. These will probably be fixed in future releases: <itemizedlist> --- 1120,1130 ---- </para> </sect2> ! <sect2 id="backup-incremental-caveats"> <title>Caveats</title> <para> ! At this writing, there are several limitations of the incremental backup technique. These will probably be fixed in future releases: <itemizedlist> Index: doc/src/sgml/config.sgml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.47 diff -c -c -r1.47 config.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/config.sgml 5 Feb 2006 18:19:14 -0000 1.47 --- doc/src/sgml/config.sgml 14 Feb 2006 04:00:53 -0000 *************** *** 1387,1393 **** <para> Turning off this parameter does not affect use of WAL archiving for point-in-time recovery (PITR) ! (see <xref linkend="backup-online">). </para> <para> --- 1387,1393 ---- <para> Turning off this parameter does not affect use of WAL archiving for point-in-time recovery (PITR) ! (see <xref linkend="backup-incremental">). </para> <para> Index: doc/src/sgml/func.sgml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.306 diff -c -c -r1.306 func.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/func.sgml 12 Feb 2006 04:44:15 -0000 1.306 --- doc/src/sgml/func.sgml 14 Feb 2006 04:00:59 -0000 *************** *** 9784,9790 **** <para> For details about proper usage of these functions, see ! <xref linkend="backup-online">. </para> <para> --- 9784,9790 ---- <para> For details about proper usage of these functions, see ! <xref linkend="backup-incremental">. </para> <para> Index: doc/src/sgml/wal.sgml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/wal.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -c -c -r1.38 wal.sgml *** doc/src/sgml/wal.sgml 4 Nov 2005 23:14:02 -0000 1.38 --- doc/src/sgml/wal.sgml 14 Feb 2006 04:01:00 -0000 *************** *** 136,142 **** <para> <acronym>WAL</acronym> also makes it possible to support on-line backup and point-in-time recovery, as described in <xref ! linkend="backup-online">. By archiving the WAL data we can support reverting to any time instant covered by the available WAL data: we simply install a prior physical backup of the database, and replay the WAL log just as far as the desired time. What's more, --- 136,142 ---- <para> <acronym>WAL</acronym> also makes it possible to support on-line backup and point-in-time recovery, as described in <xref ! linkend="backup-incremental">. By archiving the WAL data we can support reverting to any time instant covered by the available WAL data: we simply install a prior physical backup of the database, and replay the WAL log just as far as the desired time. What's more,
Bruce Momjian wrote: > I used your suggestion and renamed "online backup" to "incremental > backup", and added a mention that many database vendors call it > "online backup". Consistency would then demand that the other two be renamed to "full backup". I think we had better suggestions earlier. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > >> This addresses the technical workings of the various backup systems. > >> The fact that it is or isn't on-line, hot, continuous, fast, or flexible > >> is secondary. > > > To me, the continuous activity is the significant feature of that backup > > method. I chose "Continuous Backup" because it is the continual > > activity that is significant. "Continuous Archiving"? > > I like Peter's suggestion as-is; or "WAL Archiving". I don't like > applying adjectives that are not specific to the particular method. > That will just create more confusion down the road if we add another > feature that could also be called "continuous archiving". I do like "WAL Archiving" but I am concerned that it references a specific internal implementation detail (WAL). Is that OK? Also, I am concerned that is specificially talks about archiving the wal files and is not general enough to include the file system backup that is also necessary. -- Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us SRA OSS, Inc. http://www.sraoss.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +