Re: [HACKERS] Re: Backup and Recovery

2001-07-09 Thread Nathan Myers
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:52:49AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Nathan wrote: > > How hard would it be to turn these row records into updates against a > > pg_dump image, assuming access to a good table-image file? > > pg_dump is very hard because WAL contains only tids. No way to match > that

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Backup and Recovery

2001-07-03 Thread Rod Taylor
> With stock PostgreSQL... how many committed transactions can one lose > on a simple system crash/reboot? With Oracle or Informix, the answer > is zero. Is that true with PostgreSQL in fsync mode? If not, does it > lose all in the log, or just those not yet written to the DB? With WAL the theory

RE: [HACKERS] Re: Backup and Recovery

2001-07-03 Thread Mikheev, Vadim
> With stock PostgreSQL... how many committed transactions can one lose > on a simple system crash/reboot? With Oracle or Informix, the answer > is zero. Is that true with PostgreSQL in fsync mode? If not, does it It's true or better say should be, keeping in mind probability of bugs. > lose all