On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 03:42:48PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
! > And then 90% of the things offered here become superfluous, because
! > they are already handled site-wide. And then you will have to
! > consider integration of both pieces - and that will most likely be
! > more work and more error-prone than just writing a few adapters in
! > shell.
!
! pgbackrest's repo can be safely backed up using the simple file-based
! backup utilities that you're referring to here. I suspect some of the
! other solution's backups also could be, but you'd probably want to make
! sure.
What repo?? I seem to have missed that at first glance.
Are You indeed suggesting that one should have their data within
the database, where it is worked with, and then use Your tool
to copy it to some "repo" disk playground whatever area, and then
use their regular backup system to COPY IT AGAIN into their
backup/archiving system? Are You kiddin'?
Are You indeed suggesting that people should buy the amount
of disks that they use for their database AGAIN in order for Your
software to copy the stuff around?
Is this becoming a madhouse, or are You going to refund them that?
Let me tell You something: the people I used to work for, sometimes
had a problem. They had some amount of data that was created during
the day, and they had the night to write that data away to backup.
That would usually mean, four or eight of the big tapes, streaming in
parallel, fibers saturated, all night thru. And the problem usually was
that they would need a longer night. At least the math had to be done
properly.
Maybe You never encountered these, but there are surroundings where
there is no spare room for nonsense. Maybe that'S why these people
preferred to use oracle.
cheerio,
PMc
