El jue, 23-10-2014 a las 06:44 -0700, john@jpm-cola.com escribió:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I'm trying to recover a single database that's part of an instance
> with other databases which I do not want to recover. We do a physical
> backup and have the WAL archive files available. The purpose of this
> is to place a copy of one of the Prod databases onto the QA server
> which has other existing databases that we want to keep.
>
>
> What I was thinking was that I could recover all of the files to a
> separate area, then basically just copy the files from that database's
> directory into the QA instance database directory (same oid.) There
> was an existing copy on the QA server and I want to replace it with
> the new copy.
>
>
> Is this possible?
No, if you have a physical backup with all archive files, you will able
to restore the whole instance. It's not posible to restore only a
database with a physical backup.
> I know that I could simply do a pg_dump into this QA database but this
> seems to take way too long - days instead of the hours that it takes
> to unzip the physical backup file into a directory on the QA server.
>
>
> I also know that I could easily create a new instance but I have a
> constraint that the IP addresses and ports cannot be changed.
>
>
> If this instance only had a single database it would be a simple
> physical restore, but the presence of the additional databases has me
> stumped.
>
>
> The PostgreSQL version is 9.1.9. The server is Red Hat Enterprise
> Linux Server release 6.2 (Santiago) on a VM machine - 8 GB RAM with 2
> CPUs:
>
>
> Architecture: x86_64
> CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
> Byte Order: Little Endian
> CPU(s): 2
> On-line CPU(s) list: 0,1
> Thread(s) per core: 1
> Core(s) per socket: 2
> CPU socket(s): 1
> NUMA node(s): 1
> Vendor ID: GenuineIntel
> CPU family: 6
> Model: 44
> Stepping: 2
> CPU MHz: 2660.000
> BogoMIPS: 5320.00
> L1d cache: 32K
> L1i cache: 32K
> L2 cache: 256K
> L3 cache: 12288K
> NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0,1
>
>
> Thanks for any ideas or myth debunking that you can apply to this
> conundrum.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> John McDougald
