Hi Stephen, > On 29. Jun, 2020, at 15:32, Stephen Frost <sfrost@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Presumably they mean 'quiesce', except that that *isn't* what PG's yes, sorry, "quiece" was a typo on my part. I never fully understood what they mean with "quiesce" anyway. But then, I'm not the storage specialist in out company anyway. > start/stop backup calls do, and assuming that's what happens is quite > wrong and could lead to issues. > > The PG start/stop backup calls do things like wait for a checkpoint to > happen and track when that checkpoint was and return that info along > with whatever the stopping point of the backup is- so that you can make > sure that you have all of the WAL between those two points, and so you > can create the backup_label file that's needed to indicate on restore > that you're restoring from a backup and not just doing crash recovery. > > If it isn't an atomic snapshot across everything then start/stop calls > have to be done as well as all that other fun stuff. that's exactly why I want control over pg_start_backup() and pg_stop_backup(). It may be in the form of pre- and post-scripts, but I want control over it. I just can't seem to build trust in a plugin that saw the last release two years ago and which I can't even find out if it would allow PITRs, works with the new API and such things. I may be wrong here, but my gut feeling about this is just not good for some reason. Cheers, Paul
