Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From J. R. Nield
Subject Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Date
Msg-id 1028322744.1264.28.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations  ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>)
Responses Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations  (Richard Tucker <richt@multera.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2002-08-02 at 16:59, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:

> You don't need it.
> As long as whole block is saved in log on first after
> checkpoint (you made before backup) change to block.

I thought half the point of PITR was to be able to turn off pre-image
logging so you can trade potential recovery time for speed without fear
of data-loss. Didn't we have this discussion before?

How is this any worse than a table scan?
-- 
J. R. Nield
jrnield@usol.com





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Mikheev, Vadim"
Date:
Subject: Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations