I'm guessing you're in a hurry or in a pinch that you need to repost
after one day on a weekend. I was waiting to let someone more
knowledgeable answer, but I've had some experience with this, so
I'll answer to the best of my ability.
I apologize. I wasn't sure if my first email ended up as spam since I saw other posts getting through. I'll be patient the next time ;-)
> We have several web applications with Pg 8.2.x running on isolated servers
> (~25). The database size on each machines (du -h pgdata) is ~2 GB. We have
> been using nightly filesystem backup (stop pg, tar backup to ftp, start pg)
> and it worked well.
Any reason why you haven't been using pg_dump? There are a LOT of
drawbacks to doing filesystem level backups. For example, you can't
restore to disparate hardware (a filesystem backup made from PG on
an i386 system won't work on an amd64 system, for example)
We have used pg_dump and like it. The drawback is that it is excruciatingly slow for backups. Although our databases are ~2GB currently, they will grow to 6~10 GB per database in the next 6 months and 25~30GB in a year.
Our hardware configuration is managed well and we do not see us switching architectures often. If we do, we will be performing a pg_dump/restore at the time.
> We would like to move to PITR backups since the database size will increase
> moving forward and our current backup method might increase server
> downtimes.
How much do you expect it to increase? 2G is _tiny_ by modern
standards. Even if you expect it to increase an order of magnitude,
it's still a reasonable size for pg_dump.
Some huge advantages to pg_dump:
*) architecture-neutral dumps
*) No need to stop the database
*) Extremely simple procedure for backup and restore
*) Human parseable backups (you may not even need to restore, just
look through the data to see what was there in some cases)
*) Can restore a database without shutting down a server, thus you
can move a database from one server to another (for example)
without affecting work occurring on the second server.
We have used pg_dump on an offline database. If pg_dump is performed on a running database, will the recovery be consistent?
>
> ** START **
>
> tmpwal = "/localhost/tmp" # tmp space on server 1 for storing wal files
> before ftp
> Configure $pgdata/postgresql.conf archive_command = "cp %p $tmpwal/%f"
>
.....
>
> Recovery on server1 (skeleton commands),
> % rm -f $tmpwal/*
Why are you removing this day's WAL logs before recovery? If the
disaster occurs close to your backup time, this will result in the
loss of an entire day's data changes.
Thanks for pointing this out.
> .....
> % cp -r pgdata.hosed/pg_xlog pgdata/
> % echo "cp $tmpwal/%f %p" > pgdata/recovery.conf
> % start pg (recovery begins)
>
> ** END **
Again, how much WAL traffic are you generating? Make sure you have
enough free space on the recovery system to hold all of the WAL logs
in the event you need to recover.
How do I measure the WAL traffic generated? Is this the size variance of pg_xlog per day? We plan our database size to diskspace ratio to be 1: 1.5 on the servers.
Note that this procedure does not do a good job of protecting you
from catastrophic hardware failure. In the event that your RAID
system goes insane, you can lose as much as an entire day's worth
of updates, and there's no reason to.
Currently, a day's worth of data loss is an accepted risk. Once we get our infrastructure upgraded (moving away from FTP to NFS for these servers) it will make our backups near realtime.
I _highly_ recommend you stage some disaster scenarios and actually
use your procedure to restore some databases before you trust it.
Getting PITR working effectively is tricky, no matter how many questions
you ask of knowledgeable people. You're going to want to have first-
hand experience going through the process.
Absolutely. We will run tests to ensure the process works. Sharing experience implementing PITR in an environment like ours might help avoid some initial pitfalls.
Joey K
