X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EAEDD922F for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 04:53:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30565-08 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 07:53:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.eulerhermes.pl (host-ip43-68.crowley.pl [85.128.68.43]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDBF0D921E for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 04:53:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: from stunnel-ns1.warszawa-ext ([192.168.69.4] helo=[127.0.0.1] ident=nobody) by mail.eulerhermes.pl with esmtpa (Exim 4.42) id 1EGXWA-0008SW-Ec for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 09:53:50 +0200 Message-ID: <432BCAA0.6020902@eulerhermes.pl> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 09:49:52 +0200 From: Marcin Giedz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050716) X-Accept-Language: pl, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Backup issue Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.05 required=5 tests=[FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200509/193 X-Sequence-Number: 18930 Hello... This is what I have now: postgresql 8.0.1 - database weights about 60GB and increases about 2GB per week. Nowadays I do backup every day - according to simple procedure (pg_start_backup:rsync data:pg_stop_backup:save wals produced during backup). On 1Gb internal network it usually takes me about 1h to perform this procedure. But what if my database has ~200GB and more (I know this is a future :D)? From my point of view it won't be good idea to copy entire database to backup array. I would like to here opinions about this case - what do you propose? Maybe some of you already do something like this? Regards, Marcin Giedz