Ühel kenal päeval, L, 2007-09-08 kell 21:15, kirjutas Apoc Sagdiyev:
> > C. 'backup _is_ replication' is also true 
> >
> > ----------
> > Hannu
> It is useless to speak with a person like you 

Oh, you think that _I_ am "scandinavian" ?? Never thought about that
possibility ;P

If speaking with me is useless to you, then don't. 

> about the diffrence between Backup and Replications.
> Both Things having diffrent Concepts and Approaches, but for you it is all 
> the same.

by Capitalising these Nouns you really make them look like some Big
Concepts that are Beyond Understanding Of Mere Mortals.

> What should i say? Thadts the typically scandinavian Fishheadnature. A 
> Fish is a Fish. (anyway if one is a Wale and next is a Shark).

The reason I have been so patient with you is that your question and
writing style suggests that you are still quite young, probably no more
that 17 to 19, and also I thought that you were looking for a solution
to your problem, not just trying to look smart or pushing your latest
great idea.


What I was trying to tell you, is that in order to have a backup that
can actually be used quickly in case of failure on master db, you need
your backup to be in form of replica (that is one meaning of "backup
_is_ replication").

If you had your backup as a week-old base backup + a set of WAL files,
it can take days to bring the replacement machine up, as both unpacking
the base backup and especially replaying the WAL files take time.


> I guess, the next Thing you will say is: Nobody was on the Moon and the 
> 9/11 Incident was the Work of George W. Bush Junior itself and Santa 
> Claus will be the next President of the United States.

No! Actually I'm wearing my tin hat right now and I Never say Anything
about My Suspicions about 9/11 on Internet in fear of Echelon catching
and filing me.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to