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. :-)
Yeah, it's a different method of producing a similar outcome. However, many
companies do not want to be concerned with the management (and space)
of archived logs. Incremental backup allows them the option of performing
a full backup and then only backing up the modifications on a regular basis.
When it's time to restore, they'll restore the full backup and then the
proper sequence of incremental backups.
Cheers,
Patrick
