Hello,
as far as I have understood, the WAL backup that you control via
archive_command is the PostgreSQL equivalent to what other databases let you
do with an incremental backup. That is, if you don't forget to include the
current WAL block.
I have found a script to determine the current
On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 09:38:23AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Are you suggesting that COLLATE will impose comparison semantics on
all datatypes including non-string types? If so, I'd be interested
to know what you have in mind. If not, claiming that it makes the
issue go away is nonsensical.
--- Euler Taveira de Oliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
I have a patch like this. But this was for 7.4.x. I have to take a
look
at it.
The patch is attached. It implements day and month i18n. I fixed a few
misspelling comments. Docs is attached too.
template1=# select to_char(now(), 'Day,
Gregor Zeitlinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Also, I was wondering whether it is always safe to copy the current WAL
file, i.e. may the current WAL file be invalid in any circumstance?
If you mean current WAL file is the xlog segment in use, then it is
dangerous. We only backup the xlog
Tom Lane said:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe we need to split this into two pieces, given Tom's legitimate
concern about semaphore use. How about we increase the allowed range
for shared_buffers and max_fsm_pages, as proposed in my patch, and
leave the max_connections issue
