Greetings, * rakeshkumar464 (rakeshkumar...@outlook.com) wrote: > >The short answer is 'no'. There are complications around this, > >particularly at the edges and because files can be written and rewritten > >as you're reading them. > >Basically, no file with a timestamp after the > >checkpoint before the backup can be omitted from an incremental backup. > > what you have written above applies to oracle/db2 too. In case you are not > aware, during backup, those products have a mechanism to save the image > of any changing block as it existed before the start of the backup. that is > used > to reconstruct the PIT image of the block.
That is WAL archiving, which PG already does, but is different from backups. > Anyhow looks like this can't be done in PG. PG does support WAL archiving, as discussed on this thread, and it works exactly as you describe above. As I mentioned, there are also tools for performing incremental backups, which isn't quite the same as straight WAL archiving. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
