4 ms·
I'm willing to bet that beyond a certain threshold there's no use for an incremental backup. You either would use (delayed) replication[1] to have an 'increment
by devnonymous 3y ago
I'm willing to bet that beyond a certain threshold there's no use for an incremental backup. You either would use (delayed) replication[1] to have an 'incremental' copy or would take full backups. I don't think any large database users rushing to use incremental backups when they have full redundancy.
[1] for example https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2019/02/13/delayed-replication-for-disaster-recovery-with-postgresql/ https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2019/02/13/delayed-replication...
- rhaas 3y agoI agree that for many use cases, standbys and in particular time-delayed standbys are a better option than backups. That said, having off-line backups in tamper-proof storage is a good call, too.