As per docs, if the databases are rarely updated it could take a long
time for the WAL segment to roll over.
Yes, therefore I want to copy the current WAL (as I said earlier).
When restoring, I also want to make sure that I restore exactely to the point
when I copied the current WA segment.
-Original Message-
From: Zach Bagnall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:42 AM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Incremental Backup Script
Gregor: can you explain how to identify the current file? I had
implemented a backup and restore
On 12/26/05 11:04, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
Gregor Zeitlinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Also, I was wondering whether it is always safe to copy the current WAL
file, i.e. may the current WAL file be invalid in any circumstance?
If you mean current WAL file is the xlog segment in use, then it is
I would certainly like some instructions on this as well.
On Jan 3, 2006, at 8:41 PM, Zach Bagnall wrote:
On 12/26/05 11:04, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
Gregor Zeitlinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Also, I was wondering whether it is always safe to copy the
current WAL file, i.e. may the current WAL
On Sun, 2005-12-25 at 14:02 +0100, Gregor Zeitlinger wrote:
as far as I have understood, the WAL backup that you control via
archive_command is the PostgreSQL equivalent to what other databases
let you do with an incremental backup
No it is not an incremental backup of changed data blocks, it
Hello,
as far as I have understood, the WAL backup that you control via
archive_command is the PostgreSQL equivalent to what other databases let you
do with an incremental backup. That is, if you don't forget to include the
current WAL block.
I have found a script to determine the current
Gregor Zeitlinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Also, I was wondering whether it is always safe to copy the current WAL
file, i.e. may the current WAL file be invalid in any circumstance?
If you mean current WAL file is the xlog segment in use, then it is
dangerous. We only backup the xlog
