On Fri, 2002-08-02 at 16:01, Tom Lane wrote: > "J. R. Nield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The predicate for files we MUST (fuzzy) copy is: > > File exists at start of backup && File exists at end of backup > > Right, which seems to me to negate all these claims about needing a > (horribly messy) way to read uncommitted system catalog entries, do > blind reads, etc. What's wrong with just exec'ing tar after having > done a checkpoint? > There is no need to read uncommitted system catalog entries. Just take a snapshot of the directory to get the OID's. You don't care whether the get deleted before you get to them, because the log will take care of that.
> (In particular, I *strongly* object to using the buffer manager at all > for reading files for backup. That's pretty much guaranteed to blow out > buffer cache. Use plain OS-level file reads. An OS directory search > will do fine for finding what you need to read, too.) How do you get atomic block copies otherwise? > > regards, tom lane > -- J. R. Nield [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
