On 2/19/18 11:29 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 19 February 2018 at 16:17, David Steele <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > I did come up with a sort of Rube Goldberg-esque workaround for now >>> > involving using a clone of the prod standby VM from Veeam backup to use >>> > as the backup source (after stopping recovery and opening it as a >>> > standalone DB). >>> >>> You don't get PITR that way, of course, but at least it's a backup. As >>> long as your clone is consistent. >>> >>> >>> Yes it's a crash-consistent snapshot-based backup. I've done quite a few >>> restores from it and it works great. It can do PITR as well since I >>> would have all the WAL files from prod needed to keep recovering. But >>> for these cases I just recover it to the first consistent point and open >>> it for testing (or backups in this case). >> >> I don't think it would be safe to do PITR on a backup taken in this way. > > If you have all the WAL files, then it would be safe. I read "open it for testing (or backups in this case)" as letting recovery complete and promoting the cluster to a master before taking the backup. Don, is that the case? If it is, I think there's a problem with or without a timeline switch. If you confirm the backup is being taken as above then I'll detail my concerns. -- -David david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
