On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> wrote: > I think that description pretty much settles the question in my mind. > The implementation choice of scanning the WAL to find all the changed > blocks is more relevant to the use cases where incremental backups are > useful. If you still have to read the entire database then there's not > all that much to be gained except storage space. If you scan the WAL > then you can avoid reading most of your large data warehouse to > generate the incremental and only read the busy portion.
If you can scan the WAL, why wouldn't you just replay it? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
