Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Sergey Konoplev
Subject Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?
Date
Msg-id CAL_0b1sAQwOXWPOFuk8VJPqCfLYXGJenWM4QxdciYxW6uSmfFQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?  (Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?  (Michael Nolan <htfoot@gmail.com>)
Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?  (Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Michael Nolan <htfoot@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As I understand the docs for rsync, it will use both mod time and file size
>> if told not to do checksums.

I wonder if it is correct in general to use mtime and size to perform
these checks from the point of view of PostgreSQL.

If it works with the current version then is there a guaranty that it
will work with the future versions?

>
> Oh, so it does, I misread. Thanks! Time+size it is.
>
> ChrisA
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



--
Sergey Konoplev

a database architect, software developer at PostgreSQL-Consulting.com
http://www.postgresql-consulting.com

Jabber: gray.ru@gmail.com Skype: gray-hemp Phone: +79160686204

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "David Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Can't figure out how to use now() in default for tsrange column (PG 9.2)
Next
From: Michael Nolan
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication/cloning: rsync vs modification dates?