Melvin, * Melvin Davidson (melvin6925@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Part of my concern is that such a script is unlikely to show any problems > until it comes time to do a restore > As previously stated, the script was used to set up a slave and has done so > successfully many times. There are subsequent scripts > that check results. Ah, the impression was that this was being suggested as a way of performing regular backups. For simply creating a replica, pg_basebackup works pretty well for small systems. For larger databases, being able to perform parallel backup/restore is very useful, even if it's just for building a replica. > >What might be worse would be to pull the plug while the backup is running > and then try to bring the primary back online. > Uh, whom would be so stupid as to do that? Pulling the plug in the middle of various operations is a good way to simulate what happens if the system crashes, for whatever reason, and to make sure that processes and procedures are in place to address such a failure scenario. > >Right, there's little sense in trying to perfect a shell script when > proper solutions exist. > >>It's better to create something that others criticise than to create > nothing and criticise others. Go create, have fun!! Indeed, I'd certainly welcome criticism of pgBackRest. Thanks! Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
