On 10/16/23 12:06, Michael Banck wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 11:15:53AM -0400, David Steele wrote:
On 10/16/23 10:19, Robert Haas wrote:
We got rid of exclusive backup mode. We replaced pg_start_backup
with pg_backup_start.

I do think this was an improvement. For example it allows us to do
[1], which I believe is a better overall solution to the problem of
torn reads of pg_control. With exclusive backup we would not have this
option.

Well maybe, but it also seems to mean that any other 3rd party (i.e. not
Postgres-specific) backup tool seems to only support Postgres up till
version 14, as they cannot deal with non-exclusive mode - they are used
to a simple pre/post-script approach.

I'd be curious to know what enterprise solutions currently depend on this method. At the very least they'd need to manage a WAL archive since copying pg_wal is not a safe thing to do (without a snapshot), so it's not just a matter of using start/stop scripts. And you'd probably want PITR, etc.

Not sure what to do about this, but as people/companies start moving to
15, I am afraid we will get people complaining about this. I think
having exclusive mode still be the default for pg_start_backup() (albeit
deprecated) in one release and then dropping it in the next was too
fast.

But lots of companies are on PG15 and lots of hosting providers support it, apparently with no issues. Perhaps the companies you are referring to are lagging in adoption (a pretty common scenario) but I still see no evidence that there is a big problem looming.

Exclusive backup was deprecated for six releases, which should have been ample time to switch over. All the backup solutions I am familiar with have supported non-exclusive backup for years.

Or is somebody helping those "enterprise" backup solutions along in
implementing non-exclusive Postgres backups?

I couldn't say, but there are many examples in open source projects of how to do this. Somebody (Laurenz, I believe) also wrote a shell script to simulate exclusive backup behavior for those that want to continue using it. Not what I would recommend, but he showed that it was possible.

Regards,
-David


Reply via email to