3 ms·
That's not a bad idea, might have promise. Hashing large databases files after every few log entries might be a performance hit....not sure. Something to think
by otoolep 6y ago
That's not a bad idea, might have promise. Hashing large databases files after every few log entries might be a performance hit....not sure.
Something to think about -- thanks.
- ignoramous 6y agoSnapshotting at intervals is how most point-in-time restores scale up. The db is snapshotted at a preset time (easy way: lock db for writes whilst snap is in progress, preferably on read replicas) and then restored again (preferably, elsewhere) to see if restore did indeed work as expected (and isn't corrupt). The latest log sequence number could also be stored in the same db (in a separate table) so that it is captured along with the db-snapshot, atomically.