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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: block-level incremental backup
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYW70ZKzC0RmY8sGiL9o85gkG7HaFzkx=e4FMCQ0VjiDw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: block-level incremental backup  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:22 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> incremental page size is reduced in the actual backup.  My preference
> tends toward a block-level approach if we were to do something in this
> area, though I fear that performance will be bad if we begin to scan
> all the relation files to fetch a set of blocks since a past LSN.
> Hence we need some kind of LSN map so as it is possible to skip a
> one block or a group of blocks (say one LSN every 8/16 blocks for
> example) at once for a given relation if the relation is mostly
> read-only.

So, in this thread, I want to focus on the UI and how the incremental
backup is stored on disk.  Making the process of identifying modified
blocks efficient is the subject of
http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoahOeuuR4pmDP1W=JnRyp4fWhynTOsa68BfxJq-qB_53A@mail.gmail.com

Over there, the merits of what you are describing here and the
competing approaches are under discussion.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Experimenting with hash join prefetch
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0