Re: post-freeze damage control - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Steele
Subject Re: post-freeze damage control
Date
Msg-id f2e7f916-b32f-48ac-8200-7a803a241b5e@pgmasters.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: post-freeze damage control  ("Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
Responses Re: post-freeze damage control
List pgsql-hackers
On 4/10/24 01:59, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
> 
>> On 9 Apr 2024, at 18:45, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe we should explicitly advise users to not delete that WAL from
>> their archives, until pg_combinebackup is hammered a bit more.
> 
> As a backup tool maintainer, I always reference to out-of-the box Postgres tools as some bulletproof alternative.
> I really would like to stick to this reputation and not discredit these tools.

+1.

Even so, only keeping WAL for the last backup is a dangerous move in any 
case. Lots of things can happen to a backup (other than bugs in the 
software) so keeping WAL back to the last full (or for all backups) is 
always an excellent idea.

Regards,
-David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Speed up clean meson builds by ~25%
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: [MASSMAIL]wal_consistemcy_checking clean on HEAD