Re: block-level incremental backup - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: block-level incremental backup
Date
Msg-id 20190418153432.wdwsuau7igr2eyry@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: block-level incremental backup  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: block-level incremental backup
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 05:32:57PM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:57:35AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Also, instead of storing the file name and block number in the modblock
> > file, using the database oid, relfilenode, and block number (3 int32
> > values) should be sufficient.
> 
> Would doing it that way constrain the design of new table access
> methods in some meaningful way?

I think these are the values used in WAL, so I assume table access
methods already have to map to those, unless they use their own.
I actually don't know.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: block-level incremental backup
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal: psql PSQL_TABULAR_PAGER variable