On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 03:42:48PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: ! > And then 90% of the things offered here become superfluous, because ! > they are already handled site-wide. And then you will have to ! > consider integration of both pieces - and that will most likely be ! > more work and more error-prone than just writing a few adapters in ! > shell. ! ! pgbackrest's repo can be safely backed up using the simple file-based ! backup utilities that you're referring to here. I suspect some of the ! other solution's backups also could be, but you'd probably want to make ! sure. What repo?? I seem to have missed that at first glance. Are You indeed suggesting that one should have their data within the database, where it is worked with, and then use Your tool to copy it to some "repo" disk playground whatever area, and then use their regular backup system to COPY IT AGAIN into their backup/archiving system? Are You kiddin'? Are You indeed suggesting that people should buy the amount of disks that they use for their database AGAIN in order for Your software to copy the stuff around? Is this becoming a madhouse, or are You going to refund them that? Let me tell You something: the people I used to work for, sometimes had a problem. They had some amount of data that was created during the day, and they had the night to write that data away to backup. That would usually mean, four or eight of the big tapes, streaming in parallel, fibers saturated, all night thru. And the problem usually was that they would need a longer night. At least the math had to be done properly. Maybe You never encountered these, but there are surroundings where there is no spare room for nonsense. Maybe that'S why these people preferred to use oracle. cheerio, PMc
