Re: Add exclusive backup deprecation notes to documentation

Greetings,

* Andres Freund (andres(at)anarazel(dot)de) wrote:
> On 2019-03-18 23:35:07 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:13 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> > > > I don't view it as up for much debate.
> > >
> > > In other words, you're not willing to listen to what other people
> > > think about this issue.
> >
> > I have listened, but unfortunately the discussion just revolves around
> > "oh, it isn't actually all that bad", which, no, isn't something that's
> > going to sway my opinion.
>
> I think you're right about the original issue. But at some point you
> just gotta settle for not everyone agreeing with you (and me). Just
> pushing forward hard won't achieve anything. Nobody says you need to
> agree with people saying "it's not all that bad", but that doesn't mean
> you should just try to push forward at full speed.

This thread didn't exactly pop out of nowhere.. It's a result of the
prior discussion, with the goal of at least improving the situation by
documenting the issues and trying to make it clearer that the exclusive
mode is deprecated to hopefully provide a chance that we'll actually
remove it at some point in the future as being dangerous.

That's a pretty large step back from "let's rip it out for v12", and yet
people are now pushing back against even that, which is definitely
frustrating, and saying that I'm still pushing forward 'at full speed'
definitely comes across as not really considering that this started out
with "rip it out for v12" and has now regressed back to a documentation
patch.

Thanks!

Stephen