Greetings,
* PG Doc comments form (nore...@postgresql.org) wrote:
> It would be good to point out on the pg_basebackup documentation that it
> behaves differently from
>
> SELECT * FROM pg_start_backup('label', true, false);
> cp -a xxx yyy
> SELECT * FROM pg_stop_backup(false, true);... that's not actually a backup. Doing the above, you won't get a backup_label and unless you take other steps, PG will end up thinking it's doing crash recovery. That's not good and can lead to corruption. If you're going to consider taking a low-level backup you should read the documentation here: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/continuous-archiving.html#BACKUP-LOWLEVEL-BASE-BACKUP Which specifically goes into the question about replication slots. > method. One thing discovered was that the latter retains replication slot > information on the clone while pg_basebackup discards all replication slot > information. Not sure if it is a feature or a bug (replication slots > retention is a good thing). Our documentation points out a number of reasons why it's not, I'd suggest you read the above. > And perhaps there are more such subtle differences? Not sure that there's really that many other differences between pg_basebackup and a properly implemented low-level backup. You certainly have to do a lot more than what you have above to have a properly implemented low-level backup though. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
