backup is not replication.
but replicated database can be treated as good source of backup.
please take following remarks:
1) in English you don't capitalize nouns
2) read what other people write to you and try to understand that.
3) this is open source, try to be more cooperative not just cry for a
ready made solution
2007/9/7, apoc9009 <apoc9009@yahoo.de>:
> Markus Schiltknecht schrieb:
> > Hi,
> >
> > apoc9009 wrote:
> >> Thadt is Replication NOT Backup
> >
> > I've now read all of your messages in this thread, but I simply fail
> > to understand why you are that much opposed to the term 'replication'.
> > I think the only thing which comes any close to what you're looking
> > for is replication (in particular eager multi-master replication).
> What is your Problem in understanding the Word "Backup"?
>
> Translation for you:
> A Backup is a File or Set of Files thadt contains the Data of your
> Business critical Informations.
> It should not be Archived on the same place, the same House or the same
> Room.
>
> A Replication Database has nothing to do with a Backup, it works only
> for Failover if the Primary
> Database has a Mailfunction.
>
> A good Backuptool is needed if you have Databases with sizes over 1
> Terrabyte. The common
> Backup methods wont Work with Online Productiondatabases and without the
> Problem of Datalosses,
> this is only a Way for small and Mediumsize Databases, not for Hugh
> Databases.
>
> Keep in Mind: Backup is NOT Replication!
>
> Write it down 100 times and maybe you understand
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
--
Filip Rembiałkowski
