On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 23:07 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I think keeping the flexibility is important. If it does add an extra
> step I think that's ok once we have pg_basebackup, but it must be
> reasonably *safe*. Corrupt backups from forgetting to exclude a file
> seems not so.
Agreed.
> But if the problem is you forgot to exclude it, can't you just remove
> it at a later time?
If you think you are recovering the primary, and it's really the backup,
then you get corruption. It's too late to remove a file after that
(unless you have a backup of your backup ;) ).
If you think you are restoring a backup, and it's really a primary that
crashed, then you run into one of the two problems that I mentioned
(which are less severe than corruption, but very annoying).
Regards,
Jeff Davis
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
