On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: >> > So I'm somewhat hesitant to proclaim option 5 as the clear winner, here. >> >> I agree. I think (4) is better. > > Can depends on load? For smaller intensive updated databases the 5 can be > optimal, for large less updated databases the 4 can be better.
It seems to me that the difference is that (4) tracks which pages have changed in the background, and (5) does it in the foreground. Why would we want the latter?
Isn't more effective hold this info in Postgres than in backup sw? Then any backup sw can use this implementation.
