On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Isn't more effective hold this info in Postgres than in backup sw?
>> Then any backup sw can use this implementation.
>
> I don't think it means it can't be implemented in Postgres, but does it
> need to be done in backend?
>
> For example, it might be a command-line tool similar to pg_waldump,
> which processes WAL segments and outputs list of modified blocks,
> possibly with the matching LSN. Or perhaps something like pg_receivewal,
> doing that in streaming mode.
>
> This part of the solution can still be part of PostgreSQL codebase, and
> the rest has to be part of backup solution anyway.
I agree with all of that.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
