From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Suraj Kharage <suraj(dot)kharage(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tels <nospam-pg-abuse(at)bloodgate(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: backup manifests |
Date: | 2020-04-13 02:09:34 |
Message-ID: | 01e3ed3a-8729-5aaa-ca84-e60e3ca59db8@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/04/09 23:06, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/04/09 2:35, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 1:15 AM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>>> When there is a backup_manifest in the database cluster, it's included in
>>> the backup even when --no-manifest is specified. ISTM that this is problematic
>>> because the backup_manifest is obviously not valid for the backup.
>>> So, isn't it better to always exclude the *existing* backup_manifest in the
>>> cluster from the backup, like backup_label/tablespace_map? Patch attached.
>>>
>>> Also I found the typo in the document. Patch attached.
>>
>> Both patches look good. The second one is definitely a mistake on my
>> part, and the first one seems like a totally reasonable change.
>> Thanks!
>
> Thanks for reviewing them! I pushed them.
I found other minor issues.
+ When this option is specified with a value of <literal>yes</literal>
+ or <literal>force-escape</literal>, a backup manifest is created
force-escape should be force-encode.
Patch attached.
- while ((c = getopt_long(argc, argv, "CD:F:r:RS:T:X:l:nNzZ:d:c:h:p:U:s:wWkvP",
+ while ((c = getopt_long(argc, argv, "CD:F:r:RS:T:X:l:nNzZ:d:c:h:p:U:s:wWkvPm:",
"m:" seems unnecessary, so should be removed?
Patch attached.
+ if (strcmp(basedir, "-") == 0)
+ {
+ char header[512];
+ PQExpBufferData buf;
+
+ initPQExpBuffer(&buf);
+ ReceiveBackupManifestInMemory(conn, &buf);
backup_manifest should be received only when the manifest is enabled,
so ISTM that the flag "manifest" should be checked in the above if-condition.
Thought? Patch attached.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fix_typo_in_protocol_sgml.patch | text/plain | 2.0 KB |
remove_unnecessary_getopt_option.patch | text/plain | 532 bytes |
receive_manifest_only_when_enabled.patch | text/plain | 543 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shinoda, Noriyoshi (PN Japan A&PS Delivery) | 2020-04-13 02:20:03 | RE: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup? |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2020-04-13 01:18:28 | Re: where should I stick that backup? |