Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> That said, maybe the easier choice for a *system* (such as v-thingy)
> would be to simply to the full backup using pg_basebackup -x (or
> similar), therefor not needing the log archive at all when restoring.
> Yes, it makes the base backup slightly larger, but also much
> simpler... As a bonus, your base backup would still work if you hosed
> your log archive.
It doesn't appear to me that that resolves Heikki's complaint: if you
recover from such a backup, the state that you get is still rather vague
no? The system will replay to the end of whichever WAL file it last
copied.
I think it'd be a great idea to ensure that pg_stop_backup creates a
well defined restore stop point that corresponds to some instant during
the execution of pg_stop_backup. Obviously, if other sessions are
changing the database state meanwhile, it's impossible to pin it down
more precisely than that; but I think this would satisfy the principle
of least astonishment, and it's not clear that what we have now does.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
