|From:||Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>|
|To:||Alexey Kondratov <a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>|
|Cc:||Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, vladimirlesk(at)yandex-team(dot)ru, dsarafan(at)yandex-team(dot)ru|
|Subject:||Re: [Patch] pg_rewind: options to use restore_command from recovery.conf or command line|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
> 20 февр. 2019 г., в 17:06, Alexey Kondratov <a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> написал(а):
>> I will work out this one with postgres -C and come back till the next commitfest. I found that something similar is already used in pg_ctl and there is a mechanism for finding valid executables in exec.c. So it does not seem to be a big deal at the first sight.
> I have reworked the patch, please find new version attached. It is 3 times as smaller than the previous one and now touches pg_rewind's code only. Tests are also slightly refactored in order to remove duplicated code. Execution of postgres -C is used for restore_command retrieval (if -r is passed) as being suggested. Otherwise everything works as before.
The new patch is much smaller (less than 400 lines) and works as advertised.
There's a typo "retreive" there.
These lines look a little suspicious:
Is it supposed to be any difference between MAXPGPATH and MAX_RESTORE_COMMAND?
Besides this, patch looks fine to me.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
|Next Message||Robert Haas||2019-03-06 15:38:13||Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling|
|Previous Message||Chapman Flack||2019-03-06 15:24:42||Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function|