OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Marques wrote:
> On Jue 13 Feb 2003 16:38, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Patrick Macdonald wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Someone at Red Hat is working on point-in-time recovery, also known as
> > > > incremental backups.
> > >
> > > PITR and incremental backup are different beasts. PITR deals with a
> > > backup + logs. Incremental backup deals with a full backup + X
> > > smaller/incremental backups.
> > >
> > > So... it doesn't look like anyone is working on incremental backup at the
> > > moment.
> >
> > But why would someone want incremental backups compared to PITR? The
> > backup would be mixture of INSERTS, UPDATES, and DELETES, right? Seems
> > pretty weird. :-)
>
> Good backup systems, such as Informix (it's the one I used) doesn't do a query
> backup, but a pages backup. What I mean is that it looks for pages in the
> system that has changed from the las full backup and backs them up.
>
> That's how an incremental backup works. PITR is another thing, which is even
> more important. :-)
>
> --
> Porqu? usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera,
> si pod?s usar PostgreSQL?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Mart?n Marqu?s | mmarques@unl.edu.ar
> Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica
> Universidad Nacional
> del Litoral
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
