Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cViJb-0008Sv-Kj for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:21:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cViJb-0005QS-2s for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:21:59 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cViJa-0005Q5-Dr for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:21:58 +0000 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net ([72.66.115.51]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cViJX-0004CP-FA for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:21:57 +0000 Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BCF6B5F796; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:20:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:20:54 -0500 From: Stephen Frost To: Torsten Zuehlsdorff Cc: Vladimir Borodin , Pavel Stehule , Dinesh Chandra 12108 , "Madusudanan.B.N" , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Backup taking long time !!! Message-ID: <20170123172054.GF18360@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <23dc5b1ea9604ec3afdaabdd15491085@cyient.com> <20170120122224.GF18360@tamriel.snowman.net> <20170120134054.GH18360@tamriel.snowman.net> <7696A57C-C871-4A45-9141-FFD5F75CCB65@simply.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tCg73T+C/jTUGm03" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Editor: Vim http://www.vim.org/ X-Info: http://www.snowman.net X-Operating-System: Linux/3.13.0-91-generic (x86_64) X-Uptime: 12:18:27 up 198 days, 18:42, 5 users, load average: 0.09, 0.11, 0.13 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -5.1 (-----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org --tCg73T+C/jTUGm03 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Greetings, * Torsten Zuehlsdorff (mailinglists@toco-domains.de) wrote: > I just have around 11 TB but switched to ZFS based backups only. I'm > using snapshots therefore which gives some flexibility. I can > rolback them, i can just clone it and work with a full copy as a > different cluster (and just the differences are stored) and i can > send them incrementally to other servers. This is very fine for my > use cases but it doesn't fit everything of course. While that's another approach, it does require that those snapshots are performed correctly (both by you and by ZFS) and are entirely atomic to the entire PG instance. For example, I don't believe ZFS snapshots will be atomic if multiple ZFS filesystems on independent ZFS pools are being used underneath a single PG instance. And, as others have also said, always test, test, test. Thanks! Stephen --tCg73T+C/jTUGm03 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYhjt2AAoJEO1sijiDR2RVZZwP/1afaL9nOVxoRvuMC9S/scnm Empjn+ny1fIJk1LRm34MJRoOVpEBl4+M6or+sQRSKqDoAyLqZeCcrdg89lby5tGb ZFQk3LikSoodnCiFHuke3py1+WCU+i1ASKRU5GkRvhqkdtflpHrtZAhcydECOIzf hWey9Q+pRaMbVqp+HJusCRo0NwjoxFSlVb0doIoQf+dgyWov1qlDV8R5h+CiwceC 8MEsmuXW+w2P2SN7tuZyrgwpECOZMx4Jib5HUfMlCMh2I6szf23+ZRP+KrIUNAy0 ZR+WXic84aEx8xKigrK/ystDM2gcC6DFBo5nUu4Do7BcTACIK4BW4/+CQs21Mtcz q//KodmXL5YN/ieNXvukhHH7oo23OlsV5J3ed2tkTrPH7mnyT0s2ioxG5iuIGpsw HEreG8xwKMsVCCvD3MxvcRCNlOjxojpwS87cQrg0ABTAriL2nv05XowcQZKR3ixB ayP3sNlAI/0gF6xq8ziP+6XA0AI8/YkYf3b5wamcPTSzlbj+MZkaNRciiy2n4F5P Ftllq0qVPPzOWVGskKnutOr2ggnfIxhWEkvj5r0TN/nUTuBHnjCChZScD4JbmPnr ZTdkqzOGgxxMEzJNSsa0EArpP8Qs2iza8xC0E8/p2eY3usfUOilBYdXVNqkXmSnZ zYTkrixyjuKE2BDw8vWw =Sn8s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tCg73T+C/jTUGm03--