Re: Rename backup_label to recovery_control

At Sat, 14 Oct 2023 14:19:42 -0400, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> wrote in
> I was recently discussing the complexities of dealing with pg_control
> and backup_label with some hackers at PGConf NYC, when David
> Christensen commented that backup_label was not a very good name since
> it gives the impression of being informational and therefore something
> the user can delete. In fact, we see this happen quite a lot, and
> there have been some other discussions about it recently, see [1] and
> [2]. I bounced the idea of a rename off various hackers at the
> conference and in general people seemed to think it was a good idea.
>
> Attached is a patch to rename backup_label to recovery_control. The

Just an idea in a slightly different direction, but I'm wondering if
we can simply merge the content of backup_label into control file.
The file is 8192 bytes long, yet only 256 bytes are used. As a result,
we anticipate no overhead. Sucha configuration would forcibly prevent
uses from from removing the backup information.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center