On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 10:06 -0800, Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
> > > Replicate it???
> >
> > I'm hesitant about replacing backup with replication. It seems to me
> > like trying to shoot a mosquito with a cannon.
>
> One some threads that I've read, some posters mention that once their databases reach a certain
> size threshold, backups times become so large that replication seems to be the better perhaps only
> choice.
It can be but see PITR as well.
>
> I suppose that if replication is used, one of their child read-only servers can be dedicated the
> task of backing up the database thereby relieving that load off of the parent read/write server.
Yep, use replication and then backup the slave.
>
> But this doesn't solve the problem increasing back-up times. Of course, equipping yourself with a
> cannon now will really help after your mosquito grows in to an albatross. :o)
PITR.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Regards,
> Richard Broersma Jr.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
