Re: Proposal: Incremental Backup
| От | Claudio Freire |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Proposal: Incremental Backup |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAGTBQpb5cer1=yn1HZF9-FeZBEPtLMarcFVPWdwmgVuBUD=nXg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Proposal: Incremental Backup (desmodemone <desmodemone@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 5:26 AM, desmodemone <desmodemone@gmail.com> wrote: > b) yes the backends need to update the map, but it's in memory, and as I > show, could be very small if we you chunk of blocks.If we not compress the > map, I not think could be a bottleneck. If it's in memory, it's not crash-safe. For something aimed at backups, I think crash safety is a requirement. So it's at least one extra I/O per commit, maybe less if many can be coalesced at checkpoints, but I wouldn't count on it too much, because worst cases are easy to come by (sparse enough updates). I think this could be pegged on WAL replay / checkpoint stuff alone, so it would be very asynchronous, but not free.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: