On Dienstag, 13. Februar 2007 16:34 Tom Lane wrote: > > From what I understand, if I run a vacuum, the WAL logs will be > > enormous, as they do not simply store the vacuum command itself, > > but every single operation done on the db. > > If that's true, running vacuum before the base backup could be > > better, as there are less WAL logs to store, making the backup > > smaller, right? > > You're suffering from a fundamental misconception about the nature of > WAL. Vacuum doesn't "shrink WAL", and neither does anything else; WAL > is a history of every action ever taken in the database, and so a > vacuum will just add a bunch more to that history. Seems you didn't understand me: When I make a vacuum, and then a base backup, I do not need to include the WAL records anymore. But when I do a base backup and afterwards vacuum, the WAL will be huge already, also making restore much longer. Is there a simple way to turn on/off WAL? I'd like to use it, but then switch it off, make vacuum, turn WAL on again and make a base backup. That should save a reasonable amount of time and backup space. Databases are about 40GB now (test phase) and will be considerable more once in production (we're using dbmail.org as mailserver then). mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at // Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas. // PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi4.asc | gpg --import" // Fingerprint: EA39 8918 EDFF 0A68 ACFB 11B7 BA2D 060F 1C6F E6B0 // Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C6FE6B0
Attachment:
pgpdBhtAdzxFg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
