On 9/23/20 11:51 AM, tutiluren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
It is not deprecated or legacy and it is still used by many. The
issue is that people try to do 'partial' dumps without reading the
docs on what those switches actually do and the potential conflicts
therein. For large installations there it is often better to use
some form of replication(binary and/or logical) to maintain a
continuous backup. pg_dump can take a long time on very big
databases, so it may not keep up.
Well, I've never done partial backups, frankly because I don't trust it
to actually work. Full backups may be more wasteful with disk space, but
at least "makes sense" in some abstract way. (Also, I try to keep as
little data as possible, so they are never *gigantic*.)
Well not partial as in incremental. Instead dump only some portion of
the schema with or without its associated data.
This comes down to what your definition of embedded is? A matter of
determining whether we are talking apples or oranges.
Just what I said in my original question. Something which is bundled and
invisible to the user.
That is going to be difficult with Postgres as it is its own process. It
would take a good bit of tooling to hide that from the user.
Huh? A schema is just a name space, why does it matter how the
extension chooses to define it? I mean you could have number of
permutations of postgis.
I'm saying that PostGIS has a bug due to incorrectly constructed
internal queries which makes it impossible to properly name the schema
where PostGIS is to reside, causing my database to look very ugly when
it has to say "postgis" instead of "PostGIS" for PostGIS's schema. And
that was an example of how sloppy/bad third-party things always are, and
is one reason why I don't like it when I have to rely on "extensions".
If that is the sum of your issues with PostGIS then I really don't have
much sympathy. They are extensions so you aren't required to use them
and rely on their way of doing things. You have the choice of writing
your own code/extension or do without completely. I personally find
compromise on my part wrt to extensions greatly reduces the amount of
coding/effort I have to do to move forward. Honestly, I don't see how it
is different from the compromises that arise out of using the core
project itself.
That would entail building an AI into the code that would deal with
all the possible OS(versions), Postgres(versions), hardware
permutations.
I... guess. If "AI" means "a series of ifs". Which is what software...
is? I doubt that people who can make the world's most advanced open
source database cannot check the amount of RAM and see how fast the
CPU/disk is.
It is more then that. It would have to take into account the behavior
changes that happen in Postgres between major versions. It also would
have to account for OS specific parameters and the changes that happen
there between OS versions. It also would need to 'know' how the database
was going to be used; readonly, heavy writes, etc. Also how the database
should play with other programs on the same machine. Add to the mix
containers, cloud instances and so on and you are outrunning the ability
of 'ifs' to handle it.
Does your server runs to your satisfaction with the default settings?
Right now, yes, but that says very little as I'm the only user of it.
I've had many nightmares in the past, however, where even determining
whether the changes in the config did anything (good or bad) has been
impossible. I fundamentally don't like the idea that the config is so
"conservative" (crippled) with no obvious/easy way to "set a different
general mode". If you honestly think that the numerous
performance-related options are easy to understand, I don't know what to
say.
The thing is 'general mode' is going to mean something different to
someone running a database in the MB-low GB range vs. high GB vs. TB vs.
PB.
As to monitoring see:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/monitoring-stats.html
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/runtime-config-logging.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-LOGGING-WHAT
I know it is an extension, still it is useful:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/pgstatstatements.html
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
