On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 10:06 -0800, Richard Broersma Jr wrote: > > > Replicate it??? > > > > I'm hesitant about replacing backup with replication. It seems to me > > like trying to shoot a mosquito with a cannon. > > One some threads that I've read, some posters mention that once their > databases reach a certain > size threshold, backups times become so large that replication seems to be > the better perhaps only > choice.
It can be but see PITR as well. > > I suppose that if replication is used, one of their child read-only servers > can be dedicated the > task of backing up the database thereby relieving that load off of the parent > read/write server. Yep, use replication and then backup the slave. > > But this doesn't solve the problem increasing back-up times. Of course, > equipping yourself with a > cannon now will really help after your mosquito grows in to an albatross. :o) PITR. Joshua D. Drake > > Regards, > Richard Broersma Jr. > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at > > http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
