On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 16:38 +0000, Ian Harding wrote: > On 12/28/05, Dmitry Panov <dmitry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 11:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Dmitry Panov <dmitry@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > Yes, but if the server has crashed earlier the script won't be called > > > > and if the filesystem can't be recovered the changes will be lost. My > > > > point is the server should write into both (or more) files at the same > > > > time. > > > > > > As for that, I agree with the other person: a RAID array does that just > > > fine, and with much higher performance than we could muster. > > > > > > > Please see my reply to the other person. The other place can be on an > > NFS mounted directory. This is what the Oracle guys do and they know > > what they are doing (despite the latest release is total crap). > > RAID is great for a single box, but this option lets you have > up-to-the-second PITR capability on a different box, perhaps at > another site. My boss just asked me to set something like this up and > the only way to do it at the moment is a replication setup which seems > overkill for an offline backup. > > If this functionality existed, could it obviate the requirement for an > archive_command in the simple cases where you just wanted the logs > moved someplace safe (i.e. no intermediate compression or whatever)? > This functionality should have nothing to do with logs archiving. Think of it as of a synchronous copy (or copies) of the pg_xlog directory: files there are created, modified and removed at the same time. The archiving is still done with the "archive_command" script which could write it to a tape or do anything else you want. This could be a nice feature which would made the "online" backup really online. And it doesn't harm too, because if you don't need it you just don't use it. Best regards, -- Dmitry O Panov | mailto:dmitry@xxxxxxxxxxx Tula State University | Fidonet: Dmitry Panov, 2:5022/5.13 Dept. of CS & NIT | http://www.tsu.tula.ru/
