Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> That's exactly what pg_basebackup does. Once you move into more
> complicated scenarios with multiple standbys and WAL archiving,
> it's inevitably going to be more complicated to set up.
>
> That doesn't mean that we can't make it easier - we can and we
> should -
On 10.04.2011 20:06, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Admittedly, the above is a slightly different problem, but I think it
all points in the direction of needing more automation and more ease
of use.
And let me also note that the difficulty of getting t
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> It's not integrated and I doubt it's conveniently available on Windows.
>
> One of the biggest problems with our replication functionality right
> now is that it's hard to set up. We've actually done a good job
> making the very simplest case
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
>>> Couldn't we have a --force option which would clear all data and tablespace
>>> directories before resynching?
>
>> What would be even more useful us some kind of
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
>> Couldn't we have a --force option which would clear all data and tablespace
>> directories before resynching?
> What would be even more useful us some kind of support for
> differential copy, a la rsync.
> (Now I'm w
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> It seems a bit annoying to have to do an rm -rf * $PGDATA/ before resynching
> a standby using pg_basebackup. This means that I still need to wrap
> basebackup in a shell script, instead of having it do everything for me ...
> especially i
Magnus,
> That could certainly be useful, yes. But I have a feeling whomever
> tries to get that into 9.1 will be killed - but it's certainly good to
> put ont he list of things for 9.2.
Oh, no question. At some point in 9.2 we should also discuss how basebackup
considers "emtpy" directories.
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 20:26, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> Magnus, all:
>
> It seems a bit annoying to have to do an rm -rf * $PGDATA/ before resynching
> a standby using pg_basebackup. This means that I still need to wrap
> basebackup in a shell script, instead of having it do everything for me ...
Magnus, all:
It seems a bit annoying to have to do an rm -rf * $PGDATA/ before resynching a
standby using pg_basebackup. This means that I still need to wrap basebackup
in a shell script, instead of having it do everything for me ... especially if
I have multiple tablespaces.
Couldn't we have
