On 6/13/20 1:46 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 08:53:45PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
I agree these are all technical issues, but nevertheless - "implementation
details", which DBAs don't care about. What's important from a DBA's
perspective is not whether WAL is cluster-wide or database-wide, but whether
it's possible to manage backups/PITR/restores of individual databases in a more
convenient matter, which other RDBMS-vendors seem to provide.
I love PG, have been using it professionally since 6.5, and our company depends
on it, but there are things other RDBMS-vendors do better...
The bigger issue is that while we _could_ do this, it would add more
problems and complexity, and ultimately, I think would make the
software less usable overall and would be a net-negative. We know of no
way to do it without a ton of negatives.
How do other RDBMSs do it with ease? (I know it's an architectural issue,
but what's the architectural issue?)
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
