Re: Review of last summer's PITR patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers-pitr

From Cott Lang
Subject Re: Review of last summer's PITR patch
Date
Msg-id 1076635535.4314.1.camel@blackbox
Whole thread Raw
In response to Review of last summer's PITR patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers-pitr
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 18:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Cott Lang <cott@internetstaff.com> writes:
> > * The ability to force a WAL log switch to ensure all changes during the
> > backup are flushed to archived logs and copied.
>
> Why does that require a log switch?  You can copy the active log file in
> any case.  (There was actually code to do that in J.R.'s patch, which I
> disregarded because I see no point in it ...)

Maybe it doesn't, I'm certainly no expert in PG internals. :)

It just seems like a Good Thing (TM) to ensure that any possible changes
to the data files during the backup are in the logs that are copied to
the archive destination and backed up as part of the hot backup.




pgsql-hackers-pitr by date:

Previous
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR Dead horse?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Review of last summer's PITR patch