> With the current full backup procedure they are backed up, so I think > that having them backed up with a rsync-like algorithm is what an user > would expect for an incremental backup.
Exactly. I think a simple, flexible and robust method for file based incremental backup is all we need. I am confident it could be done for 9.5.
I would like to quote every single word Simon said. Block level incremental backup (with Robert's proposal) is definitely the ultimate goal for effective and efficient physical backups. I see file level incremental backup as a very good "compromise", a sort of intermediate release which could nonetheless produce a lot of benefits to our user base, for years to come too.
Thanks, Gabriele
I haven't been following this discussion closely at all. But at Janestreet we have been using pg_start_backup together with rsync --link-dest (onto a big NFS) to achieve incremental stored backup. In our experience this works very well, it is however advisable to look into whatever is used to serve the NFS as we had to set some options to increase the maximum number of hardlinks.
