Sorry, Arnt, that should go to the list: Am 14.11.2012 um 15:51 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
> On 11/14/2012 03:32 PM, Martin Rode wrote: >> The point is, you can do incremental backups easily if you store >> attachments in files. If you store them inside the database a full dump >> gets huge and can take a lot of time. My bodyparts table is only 1/3 of the header_fields table. So storing attachments outside the db would not help much. > > Yes. An artifact of pg_dump (and dumpall). IMO PITR backups are a better > solution than moving parts of the db where pg_dump cannot see them. But there > are drawbacks to PITR too, and I see your point. > > (Abhijit showed me a newly submitted patch for pg_dump which goes some way > towards resolving this.) > >>> You can shrink the backups by deleting attachments (conditionally, >>> blah), or by not backing up the entire db. >> Why would you not want to backup the entire db? > > Beats me. I've seen several people do it. Shocking. I have streaming replication to an offsite server set up. I'm considering recycling backups more often. Keeping 2 daily and 2 weekly backups comes into mind. Axel --- PGP-Key:29E99DD6 ☀ +49 151 2300 9283 ☀ computing @ chaos claudius
